SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(SC) 272

AIR 2008 SC 1553
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT & R.V. RAVEENDRAN
Brij Narain Singh — PETITIONER
Vs.
Adya Prasad (dead) & Ors — RESPONDENT
Appeal (civil) 5689 of 2000
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5689 OF 2000
Decided on : 18/02/2008

Headnote:Code of Civil Procedure, 1908-Section 11 and Order XLI, Rule 33-Res Judicata-Four partition suits-Though the plaintiffs in all the suits are common but defendants in suit are not common-Suit properties situated in different villages-Decision in one suit attaining finality will not operate as res judicata nor the decision in the appeals in other suit affect the decision of the suit attaining finality-Provisions of Order XLI, Rule 33 will not be attracted as the emphasis therein is on the same suit Impugned judgment upheld.

       (Paras 17 & 18).

       AIR 1953 SC 419, 57 lA 24, 43 LA 91, (1974)2 SCC 151, (1977)2 SCC 88, AIR 1931 PC 114-Referred to.

JUDGMENT:

Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

1. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court allowing the writ petition filed by the respondents. The writ petitioners had questioned order dated 24.2.1973 passed by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Consolidation, Jaunpur and the order dated 28.2.1978 passed by the Deputy Director, Consolidation Jaunpur who were the respondents 1 and 2 in the writ petition.

2. The factual position needs to be noted in brief as essentially the pivotal question relates to the applicability of the principle of res judicata.

2.1 One Gajadhar owned several lands situate in the villages of Kurthuwa, Meerapur Siroman, Manapur and Ghuskhuri, as fixed rate tenant, including the suit lands. The fixed rate tenancy of the lands in those villages was mortgaged by Gajadhar. Gajadhar died leaving behind him his widow Sirtaji, who through registered sale deed dated 8.6.1885 sold her right of redemption in regard to those lands to her relative Mata Badal.

2.2. On the death of Mata Badal, his wife Sheorani, sold the right of redemption in regard to some of the lands to third parties. After the death of Sheorani, the nephews of Mata Badal, namely Muneshwar, Bindeshwari and Bal Karan, sold the right of redemption in respect of the suit properties in Kurthuwa in favour of Bhagwan Din Singh (grandfather of appellant) under registered sale deed dated 19.6.1911. It would appear that after the purchase of equity of redemption, the said Bhagwan Din Singh cleared mortgage and was in possession of the suit lands. Bhagwan Din Singh died leaving him surviving his son Bhagwati Din Singh (father of appellant - respondent no. 3 in the writ petition from which this appeal arises).

2.3. Sirtaji who executed the sale deed on 8.6.1885 in favour of Mata Badal died in the year 1940. On her death, Ganga Prasad and Bhagwati Din (ancestors of Respondents 1 to 6 herein) filed four suits 97 to 100 for partition before the SDC, Machhli Shahar, Jaunpur, claiming that Gajadhar died issueless, that his wife Sirtaji had inherited only a life interest in the lands of her husband Gajadhar in the four villages, and that on her death, the lands of Gajadhar devolved on the near relatives of Gajadhar, namely plaintiffs 1 and 2 and Defendants 1 and 2 in the four suits, who were reversioners in regard to estate of Gajadhar. Suits 97, 98, 99 and 100 respectively related to the lands in the villages of Meerapur Siroman, Kurthuwa, Ghuskhuri and Manapur. Bhagwati Din Singh (father of Appellant) was impleaded as Defendant No.3 in suit no.98, as his father, Bhagwan Din Singh had purchased the right of redemption in respect of the Kurthuwa lands.

2.4. The following genealogical tree accepted in the earlier proceedings, traces Gajadhars relationship with the plaintiffs (Ganga Prasad and Bhagwati Din Singh) and defendants 1 and 2 (Raj Narain and Chandra Bali), in the four suits as also with Mata Badal:

Sheo Upadhyay

Meharban Palai

Baijnath Jagannath

Jaipal

Sarjoo Prasad

Deep Narain

.Kanhai

Mata Badal

Smt. Sheorani

Muneshar

Bindesari Balkaran

Ganga Prasad

Bhagwati Deen

Chandrabali

Rajnarain

D2

2.5. The four suits were decreed by Sri Ishwar Sahai, SDC Machhali Shahar, Jounpur, by a common judgment dated 20.3.1944. He held that the sale by Sirtaji under deed dated 8.6.1885 was not for legal necessity. Bhagwati Din Singh challenged the judgment in Suit No.98. The first appellate court (Additional Commissioner, Varanasi) dismissed the appeal (Appeal No.4/327) filed by Bhagwati Din Singh on 2.1.1945 on the ground of delay. No further appeal was filed and the decision in Suit No.98 attained finality insofar as Kurthuwa lands claimed by Bhagwati Din Singh. After dismissal of the appeal on 2.1.1945, on an application by the plaintiffs in Suit No.98, a final decree was passed on 3.4.1945 and possession was taken by plaintiffs in terms of the decree.

2.6. Two other appeals filed by the purchasers of lan





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top