Back
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
K.P. SINGH, J.
Shankar Saran - Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. Through Collector, Moradabad - Respondent
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 19127 of 1986
Decided on : Mar 11, 1987
LAND REFORM - U. P. ZAMINDARI ABOLITION AND LAND REFORMS ACT, 1950 - SECTION 122-B - EVICTION PROCEEDINGS - RES JUDICATA - ABUSE OF PROCESS OF COURT - DAMAGES - ALTERNATIVE REMEDY.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners were facing eviction proceedings under Section 122-B of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, initiated by the Gaon Sabha. The petitioners contended that the proceedings were barred by res judicata as similar proceedings had been terminated earlier, and that the damages awarded by the revenue authorities were excessive and arbitrary.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the revenue authorities erred in entertaining the eviction proceedings against the petitioners as they constituted an abuse of the process of the court. The court found that the earlier termination of proceedings against the petitioners operated as final and that the Gaon Sabha had failed to establish its title to the disputed land. The court also held that the amount of damages awarded was excessive and arbitrary.
Issues: 1. Whether the eviction proceedings against the petitioners were barred by res judicata? 2. Whether the damages awarded by the revenue authorities were excessive and arbitrary? 3. Whether the petitioners had an alternative remedy?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the principle of res judicata would not apply to the facts and circumstances of the case because the title to the disputed land was not finally decided between the parties at the earlier occasions. However, the court found that the order dated 14-3-1972 contained in Annexure '1' attached with the writ petition would be final between the parties in so far as it asked Gaon Sabha to seek its remedy against the petitioners in a competent court as a bonafide question of title to the disputed land was involved between the parties. 2. The court held that the revenue authorities had not examined the evidence while awarding damages to the tune of Rs. 10,910/- against the petitioners. The court found that there was no discussion on the question of damages in the judgment of the Trial court and that the revisional court had placed reliance upon a number of revenue decisions which were inapplicable to the facts and circumstances involved in the present case. 3. The court held that the petitioners had an alternative remedy to establish their claim to the disputed land by filing a suit under Section 122-B (4-D) of the Act against the order of the Collector in revision.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned judgments of the revenue courts, and dropped the eviction proceedings against the petitioners. The court directed the parties to bear their own costs.
E. P. Singh, J.
1. By means of this writ petition the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order passed by the Tahsildar, Moradabad dated 3-1-1986 evicting the petitioners from plot No. 1144/2 measuring 0.14 acres and also awarding damages to the tune of Rs. 10910/- as well as the order of Additional Collector, Moradabad dated 29th September, 1986 whereby the petitioners revision petition has been dismissed.
2. Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the opposite party no. 2 had started proceedings under section 122-B of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act against the petitioners in the year 1972 and the aforesaid proceeding was decided against the Gaon Sabha on 14-3-1972, as is evident from Annexure ' 1 attached with the writ petition. Thereafter the Gaon Sabha again started the proceeding under Sec. 122-B of the UP ZA and LR Act against the petitioners and the same was withdrawn on 28-5-1985. Thereafter in the year 1985 again proceeding under section 122-B of UP ZA and LR Act against the petitioners has been initiated. The petitioners contested the claim of Gaon Sabha on the ground that the proceedings against the petitioners were barred by the principles of res judicata and it had also been emphasised that there did not exist any rasta claimed by the Gaon Sabha and the proceedings giving rise to the present writ petition were initiated causing great harassment and mental agony to the petitioners. Pleas of the petitioners in the proceedings giving rise to the present writ petition have been contained in Annexure 4' attached with the writ petition. Annexures 5' and 6' are the orders passed by the opposite party no. 3 Tahsildar, Moradabad and the Additional Collector, Moradabad against which the petitioners have approached this court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended before me that the revenue authorities have patently erred in giving judgment for opposite party no. 2 and against the petitioners without appreciating that the termination of the earlier proceedings against the petitioners would operate as final against the Gaon Sabha.
3. Second contention raised on behalf of the petitioners is that the amount of damages awarded by the revenue authorities in the facts and circumstances of the case is highly excessive and arbitrary.
4. Third contention raised on behalf of the petitioners is that there exists a bonafide question of title and Gaon Sabha has failed to establish its title to the disputed land and has unnecessarily harassed the petitioners several times. The proceeding giving rise to the present writ petition is an abuse of the process of the Court, therefore, the impugned orders should be quashed.
Learned counsel for the contesting opposite party Gaon Sabha has submitted that the revenue authorities rightly negatived the claim of the petitioners based on the principle of res judicate and that the amount of damages awarded against the petitioners was not excessive and that the petitioners have an alternative remedy, therefore, the impugned orders should not be interfered with.
5. I have considered the contentions raised on behalf of the parties and 1 have gone through the rulings cited by the learned counsel for the parties. 1 think that the proceeding under Section 122-B of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act against the petitioners at the instance of Gaon Sabha is really an abuse of the process of the Court. On 14-3-1972 the proceeding against the petitioners was terminated on the following observations :-
6. Again on 28-5-1975 the opposite party Gaon Sabha failed in its attempt of evicting the petitioners from the disputed land as is evident from Annexure ' 3 attached with the writ petition.
No doubt the principle of res judicata would not apply to the facts and circumstances of the present case because the title to the disputed land was not finally decided between the parties at the earlier occasi
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
