Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR.
DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA, J.
Firm Dhanraj Dev Kishan and Ors. - Appellant
Versus
Sriniwas son of late Shri Ramchandra and Ors. - Respondent
S.B. Civil First Appeal Nos. 192, 197, 206 and 240/2010
Decided on : 05-02-2022
Civil Procedure Code,1908 - Order 19 Rule 2 - Specific Relief Act – Section 34 Indian Trust Act, 1882 – Section 3,19 and 20 - Indian Evidence Act – Section 41 and 43 - Hindu Succession Act 1956 – Section 8 – Property – Rent - Recover due rent- Eviction - Plaintiff had filed a civil suit against defendants - Firm and its proprietor, inter alia, stating therein that a property owned by being Shop including Nohra and defendants were tenants over property in question; patta of the property in question had been in name of late Jamnadas; out of total portion of Nohra some of portion, had been sold to plaintiff , predecessor-in-title, for a consideration - It has been averred in the plaint that during the lifetime, one had authorised his son to collect the rent of from defendants; that original landlord died - It has further been averred in plaint that to recover due rent and to get possession of the shop and Nohra from defendants, had filed a civil suit in which, defendants had denied that Durgadutt is the owner of property and it has been stated that Gyanprakash is owner of property in question and interim rent had been decided in the suit but despite of that, defendants had neither deposited the rent nor paid the same, defence of the defendants against eviction was strike out - Whether landlord is entitled to sell the entire property or sale is bogus, apart from share of Gyanprakash in disputed property – Held, It is an admitted position that suit was filed on the basis of sale-deeds executed in favour of plaintiffs and admittedly, no rent was paid to plaintiffs and question of attornment in favour of plaintiffs is seriously in dispute as discussed in detailed and it was held while deciding Appeal, which were filed by defendants against decree passed in Civil suit for declarations and injunction, that trust deed was not proved in favour of said was not become the sole owner of property at the time of execution of the sale-deeds, rent receipts were exhibited during the statement of plaintiff only, no other witness, i.e., previous landlord or any other person was examined on behalf of plaintiff and the findings of learned Trial Court were based upon fact that the right of defence of defendants was struck off due to non-payment of determined rent and in the considered opinion of this Court where relationship of landlord and tenant was not established, title of the landlord was seriously and bonafidely disputed, simply on basis that the rent was determined by learned Trial Court, on findings which were based upon findings of other suits, it cannot be held that relationship of landlord and tenant is established between parties and defence was rightly struck off - Consequently, it is held that application for mesne profit which was filed by plaintiff/respondent is not maintainable and the same is dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA, J.
1. Civil First Appeal No. 192/2010 titled as "Firm Dhanraj Dev Kishan & Anr. v. Sriniwas" has been filed by the appellants/defendants against the judgment & decree dated 26.03.2010 passed by the Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No. 3, Bikaner in Civil Original Suit No. 54/2005 titled as "Sriniwas v. Firm Dhanraj Dev Kishan & Anr." whereby, the suit has been decreed and the defendants were directed to hand over the possession of the shop in question to the plaintiff (Sriniwas).
2. Civil First Appeal No. 197/2010 titled as "Firm Dhanraj Dev Kishan & Anr. v. Sriniwas & Ors." has also been filed by the appellants/defendants against the judgment & decree dated 26.03.2010 passed by the Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No. 3, Bikaner in Civil Original Suit No. 55/2005 titled as "Sriniwas v. Hanuman Bux & Ors." whereby, the suit has been decreed and it has been ordered that the plaintiff (Sriniwas) is the owner of the property in question, as mentioned in para-12 of the suit and all the proceedings initiated by the defendants were declared ab initio void and at the same time, the defendants were restrained from interfering in the property in question in any manner.
3. Civil First Appeal No. 206/2010 titled as "Omprakash & Anr. v. Sriniwas & Ors." has been filed by the appellants/defendants against the judgment & decree dated 26.03.2010 passed by the Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No. 3, Bikaner in Civil Original Suit No. 55/2005 titled as "Sriniwas v. Hanuman Bux & Ors." whereby, the suit has been decreed and it has been ordered that the plaintiff (Sriniwas) is the owner of the property in question, as mentioned in para-12 of the suit and all the proceedings initiated by the defendants were declared ab initio void and at the same time, the defendants were restrained from interfering in the property in question in any manner.
4. Civil First Appeal No. 240/2010 titled as "Bhanwar Lal v. Sriniwas & Ors." has been filed by the appellant/defendant against the judgment & decree dated dated 26.03.2010 passed by the Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No. 3, Bikaner in Civil Original Suit No. 55/2005 titled as "Sriniwas v. Hanuman Bux & Ors." whereby, the suit has been decreed and it has been ordered that the plaintiff (Sriniwas) is the owner of the property in question, as mentioned in para-12 of the suit and all the proceedings initiated by the defendants were declared ab initio void and at the same time, the defendants were restrained from interfering in the property in question in any manner.
5. The facts of the cases are that the plaintiff (Sriniwas) had filed a civil suit (No. 54/2005) against the defendants - Firm Dhanraj Dev Kishan and its proprietor Dev Kishan, inter alia, stating therein that a property owned by the plaintiff had been situated at Nokha Mandi, Bikaner being Shop including Nohra No. 34 and the defendants were the tenants over the property in question; the patta of the property in question had been in the name of late Jamnadas; out of the total portion of the Nohra No. 34, some of the portion, measuring 180 dargaji, had been sold to the plaintiff by Gyanprakash Bhadani S/o late Onkardutt Bhadani, predecessor-in-title, on 02.09.1986 for a consideration of Rs. 30,000/-. It has been averred in the plaint that during the lifetime, Shri Onkardutt had authorised his son Gyanprakash @ Gyandutt Bhadani to collect the rent of Rs. 300/- from the defendants; that the original landlord Shri Onkardutt died on 10.10.1981. It has further been averred in the plaint that to recover the due rent of Rs. 2400/- and to get the possession of the shop and Nohra from the defendants, Durgadutt S/o Onkardutt had filed a civil suit (No. 44/1982) in which, the defendants had denied that Durgadutt is the owner of the property and it has been stated that Gyanprakash is the owner of the property in question and the interim rent had been decided in the suit but despite of that, the defendants had ne
A suit for possession must include a declaration of title when there is a dispute over ownership; mere possession cannot support recovery claims.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the suit was maintainable under the Indian Trusts Act, as the defendant failed to prove the absence of a jural relationship between the partie....
Trust properties cannot be alienated by a trustee without specific authority, and mere revenue entries do not confer ownership rights against trust interests.
In a suit for declaration of title, the plaintiff must prove ownership; failure to seek possession forfeits claims against an adverse possessor.
The court held that a sale deed remains valid despite non-payment of consideration, affirming ownership rests with the purchaser as per registered transaction under the Transfer of Property Act.
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
