Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
NIDHI GUPTA
Executive Engineer, Eastern Canal Colony, Ferozepur – Appellant
Versus
Harbans Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NIDHI GUPTA, J.
CM-9524-C-2011
1. Prayer in this application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is for condonation of delay of 348 days in filing the accompanying appeal.
2. Heard.
3. For the reasons mentioned in the application which is duly supported by an affidavit of the applicant/appellant No.1, the same is allowed and delay of 348 days in filing the appeal is condoned.
RSA-3416-2011 (O&M)
1. Present Second Appeal has been filed by the defendants against the judgment of reversal dated 24.05.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ferozepur; whereby suit filed by the plaintiff/LRs of the deceased plaintiff Jagir Singh, for mandatory injunction, has been decreed by learned First Appellate Court.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff had filed the instant civil suit seeking decree of mandatory injunction against the appellants/defendants to pay compensation amount to the plaintiff; or in the alternative, relief directing the defendants to handover the vacant possession of the suit land measuring 5K 16M as described in the plaint to the plaintiff. The case as pleaded by the plaintiff was that plaintiff had been in possession of the suit land f
Appellate Court may permit additional evidence to be produced whether oral or documentary, if conditions mentioned in Order 41 Rule 27 are satisfied.
The court discussed the legal principles related to the jurisdiction of the court to interfere with concurrent findings of fact and law.
Landowners must establish clear title or proof of ownership against government claims to avoid dismissal of suits for injunctions on public land, as mere possession or revenue entries do not suffice.
Proper identification of property ownership is essential in disputes, and prior deeds must reflect accurate details to establish rightful title.
Mere possession or sporadic revenue entries do not confer ownership title; clear documentation and continuous proof of possession is necessary, especially against government parties.
The right to property is inviolable and sacred, and no one may be deprived of it without public necessity and just indemnity, as per the Land Revenue Act and the Right to Fair Compensation Act, 2013.
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
