Back
Munshi Ram – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Administration – Respondent
How to determine the right of private defence in possession disputes? What is the extent of force permissible in private defence when defending property? What are the grounds for acquittal or conviction reversals in private defence cases involving eviction of trespassers?
Key Points: - The court held that the appellants had a right of private defence since they were in possession and the complainants were trespassers, and they did not exceed that right. (!) (!) (!) - Delivery of possession through an evacuee-property framework required proper compliance with Section 19, including prior actions under sub-sections (1) and (2); improper or non-compliant delivery is ineffective, affecting possession status. (!) (!) (!) - The right of private defence should be liberally construed in defense of possession, permitting resistance to forcible dispossession, as long as force used is not excessive beyond necessity. (!) (!) (!)
Judgement
HEGDE, J. :-Two questions that arise for decision in this appeal by special leave are (1) whether the appellants have established satisfactorily the right of private defence pleaded by them and (2) if they had that right, have they exceeded the same?
2. The prosecution case is as follows: Field No. 1129/477 measuring five bighas and thirteen biswas situated in Kilokri was an evacuee property and as such was under the management of the managing officer That property was acquired by the Central Government under the Displaced Persons Act, 1954. (But for the sake of convenience we shall refer to that property hereinafter as evacuee property). The same was sold by public auction on January 2, 196l and purchased by PW 17 Ashwani Kumar Dutt for a sum of Rs. 7600. Provisional delivery of that property was given to the vendee on October 10, 1961. The sale certificate was issued on February 8, 1962. The actual delivery was given on June 22, 1962 as per the warrant issued by PW 5, Khushi Ram, the managing officer. The said delivery was effected by PW 10 Sham Das Kanungo. On July 1, l962 when PW 17 and his father PW 19, R. P Dutt went to the field with PW 16, Gopal Das, PW 15 Nand Lal
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
