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

2022 Supreme(Raj) 2107

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Dinesh Mehta, J.
Pandurang Marda – Appellant
Versus
Smt. Vinod Kanwar & Ors. – Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17813/2021
Decided On : 05-01-2022

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Sanjeev Johari, Through Vc, for the Appellant
Mr. G.R. Punia, Sr. Advocate With Mr. Rajesh Punia, Through Vc, for the Respondent.

The necessity of translations for crucial documents in property disputes to enable the courts to assess the claims effectively.

Headnote:

Translation - Property Dispute - Code of Civil Procedure - Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner initiated a suit for injunction claiming ownership of a plot based on a family settlement and a patta issued by the Maharaja of Marwar. The trial Court granted temporary injunction, but the Appellate Court reversed the decision due to the lack of translations of the relevant documents.

Finding of the Court:

The trial Court and the Appellate Court failed to consider the lack of translations of crucial documents, leading to an incorrect decision. The petitioner was directed to provide translations, and the application for temporary injunction was restored to the trial Court.

Issues: Ownership of the plot, admissibility of documents without translations, and the grant of temporary injunction.

Ratio Decidendi: The lack of translations of crucial documents hindered the courts' ability to assess the petitioner's claim, leading to the decision being set aside.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the application for temporary injunction was restored to the trial Court for reconsideration with the provision of translations of the relevant documents.

ORDER

1. The writ petition in hand is directed against the order dated 01.12.2021, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Makrana, District Nagaur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Appellate Court'), vide which the order dated 26.02.2019, passed by the learned Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, Makrana, District Nagaur (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned trial Court') has been reversed.

2. Pithily put, facts germane for the present purposes are that the petitioner-plaintiff initiated a suit for injunction contending that a plot, ad-measuring 6300 sq. ft., situated in Village Ranigaon, as mentioned in para No.l of the plaint, belongs to the plaintiff and has come in his share by virtue of a family settlement dated 28.02.1969 (written in Marathi) on which the defendants are illegally raising construction.

3. In support of his assertion, a patta issued by the Maharaja of Marwar was also relied upon, which is written in vernacular marwari.

4. Along with the aforesaid suit, an application seeking temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure was also filed.

5. The defendants opposed the grant of temporary injunction by filing reply asserting that the defendants are having a registered patta in their favour issued by the concerned Gram Panchayat in furtherance of an agreement to sell dated 23.07.2018, executed by one Mr. Moolchand Mardha.

6. Considering the material available on record, the trial Court allowed the application for temporary injunction and vide order dated 26.02.2019 required the defendants to maintain status quo on the subject piece of land.

7. The order aforesaid was challenged by the respondents (defendants) by way of an appeal before the Appellate Court, which came to be allowed vide order dated 01.12.2021.

8. The Appellate Court, while allowing the appeal, has observed that the documents of plaintiff, namely, patta issued by the Maharaja of Marwar was in vernacular marwari language whereas the family settlement dated 28.02.1969 was in Marathi. As translations thereof were not produced, the Appellate Court found itself unable to adjudge the plaintiff's right, title and interest in the property.

9. Mr. Sanjeev Johari, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the Appellate Court has erred in deciding the issue of prima facie case against the petitioner (plaintiff) and in favour of the respondents (defendants). He submitted that when the defendants have admittedly derived the title on the basis of an agreement to sell, which was not only an unregistered document, even applicable stamp duty thereupon was not paid, the Appellate Court could not have held prima-facie case to be in their favour.

10. He argued that as against this, the petitioner-plaintiff had produced enough documentary evidence to show that the petitioner was having right, title and interest in the said plot.

11. Mr. G.R. Punia, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the respondents-defendants submitted that even on perusal of the family settlement, the location of land, its measurement and its neighbourhood cannot be traced. He argued that in absence of any categorical indication of the plot and its measurement, the petitioner's assertion about the ownership and interest in the plot in question is untenable.

12. It may be noted that on the last date of hearing, the Court required/directed an English translation of the family settlement dated 28.02.1969 to be filed and the same has been filed.

13. Though rival counsel have raised the objection about the admissibility of the documents relied upon by their opposite parties for want of registration and payment of appropriate stamp duty, this Court does not deem it appropriate to make any observation in this regard, as the same may prejudice rights of the parties.

14. Having perused the material available on record, this Court finds that the basic document of title on which the petitioner claims to have interest in the property, is the patta issued by Mahara

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