JASWANT SINGH
Abhey Singh – Appellant
Versus
Gian Singh – Respondent
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points summarized:
A co-sharer does not have the right to construct any building on joint land without obtaining the consent of the other co-sharers. This principle applies regardless of whether the construction causes direct harm or loss to other co-owners (!) (!) (!) .
The appropriate remedy for a co-sharer who wishes to prevent unauthorized construction is a suit for a permanent injunction, rather than an action for partition of the property [judgement_subject] (!) .
The case involved a dispute over the construction of a structure (Chhun) on joint property, specifically on the banks of a pond used collectively by co-sharers. The court found that such construction would obstruct religious rituals and pollute the water, adversely affecting the co-sharers' use of the property [Fact of the Case] (!) (!) .
The court emphasized that even if the construction does not cause direct damage, it is not permissible for a co-sharer to build on joint land without the consent of others. The law provides mechanisms for partition if co-sharers wish to divide the property, but unilateral construction is not allowed (!) (!) .
The court held that the remedy for the appellants was to seek an injunction to prevent or remove unauthorized constructions, rather than pursuing a partition action. The appeal was allowed, and the lower court's judgment was set aside in favor of granting the injunction [Final Decision] (!) .
The decision underscores that in joint property, the rights of co-sharers are limited to use and enjoyment, and any construction or alterations require mutual consent. Unauthorized construction can be restrained through an injunction, especially when it causes obstruction or pollution affecting other co-sharers’ rights (!) (!) .
No costs were awarded in this case, and the court ordered the respondents to remove the unauthorized structure (Chhun) during the pendency of the appeal [Final Decision] (!) .
Please let me know if you need further analysis or assistance.
2. It is common ground between the parties that the land on which the Chhun was built or sought to be re-built was the joint property of the parties and other co-sharers of the village. Although the co-sharers are entitled to use the common land but the user cannot be such as to cause harm or injury to the other co-sharers. I am fortified in this view by a decision of the Allahabad High Court in Najju Khan v. Imtiaz-ud-Din, I. L. R. 18, Allahabad, 115, which was followed in I. L. R. 27 Allahabad, 688; 32 Indian Cases, 690 and A.I.R. 1925 Allahabad, 700.
3. In all these authorities it has been laid down that one co-sharer out of the many has no right to build on what is joint land without the consent of the others notwithstanding that the erection of such building may cause no dire
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.