Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
Committee Of Management Jami Masjid Sambhal Ahmed Marg Kot Sambhal – Appellant
Versus
Hari Shankar Jain – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, J.
1. The present revision filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter called as the ‘ CPC ’) questions the order dated 19.11.2024 passed on application paper no. 3C filed by plaintiff respondent nos. 1 to 8 for grant of leave to institute the suit before expiry of period of notice under Section 80 (2) CPC , and the order dated 19.11.2024 for appointment of Commission for local investigation paper no. 8C under Order XXVI Rule 9 and 10 CPC .
2. Facts, leading to filing of present revision, are that plaintiff respondent nos. 1 to 8 instituted a Civil Suit No. 166 of 2024, which was later numbered as Original Suit No. 182 of 2024, claiming relief of declaration and permanent injunction against revisionist/defendant no. 6 and respondent nos. 9 to 13.
3. Relief ‘A’ was for declaration to the effect that plaintiffs have right to access into Sri Harihar Temple/alleged Jami Masjid situated in city Sambhal as described in paragraph nos. 1 and 2 of the plaint and declared as protected monument on 18.11.1920 under Section 3 of the Ancient Monuments Preservations Act, 1904 (hereinafter referred as the ‘Act of 1904’). Relief ‘B’ was for declara
A court may grant leave to institute a suit without notice under Section 80(2) CPC if urgent relief is necessary, and the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner for local investigation is valid and ....
The Places of Worship Act, 1991 does not bar the determination of the religious character of a place of worship, which must be established through evidence in court.
The court affirmed the priority of public interest in preserving historical monuments over private construction rights, ruling unauthorized constructions after necessary prohibitions as invalid.
The court ruled that the plaints disclose a valid cause of action, are not barred by limitation, and the religious character of the property requires evidence to be determined at trial.
Amendments to pleadings in civil suits should be allowed if they facilitate proper adjudication and do not introduce a new cause of action.
The court affirmed that new constructions within prohibited areas near protected monuments violate statutory provisions, emphasizing the need for preservation of historical sites over individual cons....
The declaration of the Christian Cemetery as a Heritage site was illegal due to non-compliance with statutory procedures under the Assam Ancient Monuments and Records Act, 1959.
Amendments to include new parties in a pending suit are permissible if they clarify existing claims without introducing new causes of action, ensuring effective adjudication.
Appointment of Advocate Commissioner for inspection of Gyanvapi premises – Report of Commissioner does not by and of itself amount to a substantive finding on matters in dispute and is subject to pro....
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
