SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, PANKAJ MITHAL, JJ.
Trinity Infraventures Ltd. and Others – Appellants
Versus
M.S. Murthy and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 4049-4053 of 2023 (Arising Out of SLP (C) Nos. 2373-2377 of 2020) with Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (Arising Out of SLP (C) No. 24098 of 2022), Civil Appeal Nos. of 2023 (Arising Out of SLP (C) Nos.8884-8887 of 2022), Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (Arising Out of SLP (C) No. 2203 of 2022), Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (Arising Out of SLP (C) No. 256 of 2022), Civil Appeal Nos. of 2023 (Arising Out of SLP (C) Nos.8888-8891 of 2022), Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (Arising Out of SLP (C) No. 1584 of 2022), Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (Arising Out of SLP (C) No. 980 of 2022), Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (Arising Out of SLP (C) No. 8872 of 2022), Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (Arising Out of SLP (C) No. of 2023) (Arising Out of Diary No. 19266 of 2022)
Decided On : 15-06-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. special leave petition granted. (Para 1 , 4) |
| 2. arguments related to ownership and partition. (Para 5 , 36 , 45) |
| 3. historical context of the paigah estate. (Para 6 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 4. unresolved claims and independent rights. (Para 70 , 173 , 174) |
| 5. final order dismissing all appeals. (Para 226) |
JUDGMENT :
V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J.
1. Permission to file special leave petitions is granted in Diary No. 19266 of 2022.
2. Delay condoned.
3. Leave granted.
4. Aggrieved by a common judgment rendered by the Division Bench of the High Court for the State of Telangana in a batch of intra-Court appeals, confirming the judgment of the learned Single Judge of the High Court in a batch of applications in a civil suit, various parties including the State of Telangana and some third parties have come up with these civil appeals.
5. We have heard Shri Gopal Sankarnarayanan, learned senior counsel appearing for one set of parties who are the appellants herein (and who claim to be the assignees of the decree), Shri B. Adinarayana Rao, Shri Chander Uday Singh, Shri Ranjit Kumar, learned senior counsel and Shri Santosh Krishnan, learned counsel appearing for parties who obstructed the execution of the decree (claim petitioners) and who succeeded before the High Court, Shri C.S. Vaidyanathan, learned senior counsel appearing for the State of Telangana and Shri V.V.S. Rao, Shri Hemendranath Reddy and Shri K.S. Murthy, learned senior counsel appearing for third parties and Shri Dushyant Dave, learned senior counsel appearing for an Asset Reconstruction Company which has filed an application for intervention.
Background Facts:
6. Hyderabad was a Princely State until it came to be annexed to the Union of India on 18.09.1948 through police action which came to be popularly known as “Operation Polo.” HEH the Nizam was its Ruler till then. While outsourcing is something which we have now come to be familiar with only in the twentieth century, HEH the Nizam seems to have adopted the practice of outsourcing even defence services more than 200 years ago. It seems that the Nizam had the practice of granting certain lands to people for the purpose of supply and maintenance of Armed Forces. The lands so granted came to be known as “Paigah Estate.” The dispute on hand relates to a Paigah granted to a person by name Khurshid Jah and the grant came to be known as Khurshid Jah Paigah. To understand the nature and sweep of the dispute on hand, it may be relevant to take a peep into history.
7. It appears that one Mir-Qamar-ud-din Khan (who was given the title Asaf Jah) was one of the feudal chiefs of the Moghuls and was the Governor of Deccan from 1713 to 1721. Later he proclaimed independence and founded the Asaf Jahi dynasty in Hyderabad.
8. As stated by Gribble in his “History of Deccan”, Asaf Jah brought with him a number of followers, both Mohammadens and Hindus, who were attached to his person and fortunes. To the Mohammedan nobles, he granted Jagirs or estates on military tenure and employed them as his Generals. The Hindus were employed principally in the administrative work in the departments of revenue and finance. To them also he granted Jagirs as remuneration for their services and all these Jagirs whether granted for civil or military purposes came to be regarded as hereditary.
9. Distinguished among the Muslim followers was Mohammed Abul Khair Khan, a member of a noted family which had settled for some generations in Oudh and afterwards in Agra. He had rendered meritorious services in battles and was the recipient of several favours and honours at the hands of the Nizam. He was eventually made a “Commander of 6000 horsemen”, with the title of “Imam Jung.” He died in 1751 A.D. His son, Abul Fateh Khan, who followed in the footsteps of h
The main legal point established in the judgment is the finality of the preliminary decree, the lack of jurisdiction of the civil court to decide the rights of parties with regard to Jagirs, and the ....
The executing court cannot deliver possession without a final decree, and unregistered deeds do not confer valid rights; dispossession without due process is illegal.
Point of Law : As it is seen that it is nobody’s case that suit in question is a suit coming within ambit of Order XX Rule 18(2) of Code and as such question of a preliminary decree does not arise at....
Claims re-agitating settled property disputes are barred by res judicata, adhering to principles of finality in litigation.
Civil Suit - Additional Evidence - Wherever additional evidence is allowed the court shall record reason for its admission.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.