Back
2000 (2) JLJ 143
A.K. Gohil, J.
State of M.P. and another v. Uttam Chand and others
Misc. Appeal No. 785 of 1999; against the order of District Judge, Shajapur,
passed in Civil Suit No. 17-A of 1999; Decided on 26.11.1999.
(2) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O. 43 R. 1(r) and O. 39 Rr. 1 and 2 -- no plea taken in reply to application under O. 39 Rr. 1 and 2 -- such plea cannot he taken for the first time in appeal.
It was not the case of the appellants/State before the learned District Judge. In the reply also nowhere they had mentioned that they have taken this action under section 248 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code. [para 13
The appellants/State cannot be permitted to set up a case under section 248 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code very first time at this appellate stage. [Para 14
(3) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M.P.) -- S. 248 -- provisions under -- are applicable to unoccupied, abadi, service lands, etc. -- do not apply to building property.
Section 248 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code provides for penalty for unauthorisedly taking the possession of the land which includes unoccupied land, abadi, service kind or any other land which has been set apart for any special purpose under section 237 or upon any land which is the property of the Government. Section 237 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code provides use of unoccupied land for exercise of Nistar rights.
In such circumstances it is clear that the provisions of section 248 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code are not applicable on the property in dispute. [Paras 14 & 15
(4) Possession -- person in settled possession of property -- he cannot be dispossessed even by owner except by due course of law.
Where a person is in settled possession of property, even on the assumption that he had no right to retain on the property, he cannot be dispossessed by the owner of the property except by due course of law. AIR 1989.SC 2097 followed. [Para. 16
(5) Words and Phrases -- word "trespass" -- in the circumstances may include forcibly entering in possession and dispossession by landlord-possession should be obtained through a Court. AIR 1968 SC 620 and AIR 1924 PC 144 relied on. [Para 16
(6) Possession -- of trespasser may be thrown out while in the process -once accomplished -- legal remedy of eviction has to be taken. AIR 1977 SC 619 followed. [Para 17
(7) Possession -- from tenant -- cannot be obtained extra-judicially by use of force even if period of tenancy has expired. AIR 1989 SC 997 followed. [Para 18
(8) Possession -- on Government land -- by putting buildings thereon -- encroachment, if any, can be removed under a decree of civil Court and not otherwise. AIR 1961 SC 1570 followed. [Para 19
(9) State -- not acting under sovereign rights -- can only act in pursuance of the powers given to it by law. AIR 1931 PC 248 relied on. [Para 19
(10) Justice -- democracy functioning under Rule of Law -- it is not enough to do justice -- justice should be seen to be done. AIR 1956 SC 479 followed. [Para 20
(11) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O. 39 Rr. land 2 – suit for injunction filed against State -- notice served -- Revenue officer on same day taking possession of suit property -- action is malafide -- order of restoration of possession is justified. [Para 21
(12) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O. 39 Rr. land 2 -- mandatory injunction -- should not be granted to restore status-quo on date earlier to suit. 1973 JLJ 914 relied on. [Para 22
(13) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O. 39 Rr. l and 2 -- grant of temporary injunction -- possession must be legal -- trespasser not entitled to injunction. 1990 (1) MPWN 136 relied on. [para 22
(14) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O. 39 Rr. 1 and 2 -- plaintiff already in possession on date of suit -- dispossessed illegally on same day after service of summons -- action of defendants found malafide -- order of restoration of possession is justified. 1990 (1) MPWN 37 and 1981 (1) MPWN 111 relied on. [Paras 23 & 27
(15) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O. 39 Rr. 1 and 2 -- existence of prima facie case and right of enjoyment -- is condition to grant injunction -- prima facie case is not prima facie title. AIR 1993 SC 276 followed. [Para 24
(16) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O, 39 Rr. 1 and 2 -- grant of injunction -- claim should not be frivolous or vexatious -- there is serious question to be tried. 1978 JLJ 51 relied on. [Para 23
(17) Civil P.C., 1908 -- O. 39 Rr. 1 and 2 -- temporary injunction in mandatory form -- can be granted in very rare cases -- the same has to be adjusted in aid of equity and justice. AIR 1956 Cal. 428 relied on. [Para 26
¼1½ Hkw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 248 && ds v/khu dkjZokbZ && mi[kaM vf/kdkjh }kjk ugha dh tk ldrh && rglhynkj dh izkjafHkd dkjZokbZ dj ldrk gSA
¿ iSjk 13À
¼2½ flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk] 1908 && vk- 43 fu- 1¼n½ rFkk vk- 39 fu- vkSj 2 && vk- 39 fu- 1 vkSj 2 ds v/khu vkosnu ds mÙkj esa vfHkokd~ ugha fd;k x;k && ,slk vfHkokd~ vihy esa izFke ckj ugha fd;k tk ldrkA
fo}ku ftyk U;k;k/kh‘k ds le{k vihykFkhZx.k@jkT; dk ;g i{kdFku ugha FkkA mÙkj esa Hkh] mUgksausa dgha mYys[k ugha fd;k Fkk fd mUgksaus ;g dkjZokbZ e-iz- Hkw&jktLo lafgrk dh /kkjk 248 ds v/khu dh gSA ¿ iSjk 13À
vihykFkhZx.k@jkT; dks bl vihyh izØe ij e-iz- Hkw&jktLo lafgrk dh /kkjk 248 ds v/khu izFke ckj i{kdFku LFkkfir djus dh vuqKk ugha nh tk ldrhA ¿ iSjk 14À
¼3½ Hkw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 248 && mica/k && n[kyjfgr] vkcknh] lsok Hkwfe vkfn dks ykxw gksrs gS && bekjrh laifÙk dks ykxw ugha gksrsA
e-iz- Hkw&jktLo lafgrk dh /kkjk 248 esa ,slh Hkwfe ij] ftlesa n[kyjfgr Hkwfe] vkcknh] lsok Hkwfe vFkok /kkjk 237 ds v/khu fdlh fo‘ks"k iz;kstu ds fy, i`Fkd j[kh xbZ Hkwfe lfEefyr gS] vFkok ,slh fdlh Hkh Hkwfe ij tks ljdkj dh laifÙk gS] vizkf/k—r :i ls dCtk djus ds fy, ‘kkfLr micaf/kr gSA e-iz- Hkw&jktLo lafgrk dh /kkjk 237 esa fuLrkj vf/kdkjksa dh iz;qfDr ds fy, n[kyjfgr Hkwfe dk mi;ksx micaf/kr gSA
,slh ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa] ;g Li"V gS fd e-iz Hkw&jktLo lafgrk dh /kkjk 248 ds mica/k fooknxzLr laifÙk dks ykxw ugha gksrsA ¿ iSjk 14 ,oa 15À
¼4½ dCtk && laifÙk ij LFkkfir dCtk/kkjh O;fDr && fof/k ds lE;d~ vuqØe ds flok, mls Lokeh }kjk Hkh csdCtk ugha fd;k tk ldrkA
tgk¡ O;fDr dk laifÙk ij LFkkfir dCtk gS ogk¡] bl /kkj.kk ds vk/kkj ij Hkh fd mls laifÙk j[ks jgus dk dksbZ vf/kdkj ugha Fkk] fof/k ds lE;d~ vuqØe ds flok, laifÙk ds Lokeh }kjk csdCtk ugha fd;k tk ldrkA , vkb vkj 1989 ,l lh 2097 vuqlfjrA
¿ iSjk 16À
¼5½ ‘‘kCn rFkk dCtk && ‘‘kCn *vfrokj* && ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa cyiwoZd dCtk djuk rFkk Hkw&Lokeh }kjk csdCtk fd;k tkuk lfEefyr gks ldrs gS && dCtk U;k;ky; ds ek/;e ls vfHkizkIr fd;k tkuk pkfg,A , vkb vkj 1968 ,l lh 620 rFkk , vkb vkj 1924 ih lh 144 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 16À
¼6½ dCtk && vfrpkjh dk dCtk izfØ;k esa gks rc gVk;k tk ldrk gS && dCtk izkIr gks tkus ij && csn[kyh dk fof/kd mipkj djuk gksxkA , vkb vkj 1997 ,l lh 619 vuqlfjrA
¿ iSjk 17À
¼7½ dCtk && vfHk/kkjh ls vfHk/k`fr dh vof/k voekfur gks xbZ gks rc Hkh U;kf;dsrj :i ls cy ds iz;ksx ls vfHkizkIr ugha fd;k tk ldrkA , vkb vkj 1989 ,l lh 997 vuqlfjrA ¿ iSjk 18À
¼8½ dCtk && ljdkjh Hkwfe ij && ml ij bekjrsa [kM+h dj ds && vf/kØe.k] ;fn dksbZ gks] flfoy U;k;ky; dh fMØh ds v/khu gVk;k tk ldrk gS] vU;Fkk ughaA , vkb vkj 1961 ,l lh 1570 vuqlfjrA ¿ iSjk 19À
¼9½ jkT; && izHkqrklaié vf/kdkjksa ds v/khu dk;Z ugha fd;k tkus dh n‘kk esa && fof/k n‘kk esa && fof/k }kjk nh xbZ ‘kfDr;ksa d vuqlkj.k esa gh dk;Z fd;k tk ldrk gSA , vkb vkj 1931 ih lh 248 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 19À
¼10½ U;k; && fof/klEer ‘kklu ds v/khu —R;‘khy yksdra= && U;k; djuk i;kZIr ugha && U;k; fd;k x;k nf‘kZr gksuk pkfg,A , vkb vkj 1956 ,l lh 479 vuqlfjrA
¿ iSjk 20À
¼11½ flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk] 1908 && vk- 39 fu- 1 rFkk 2 && O;kns‘k ds fy, okn jkT; ds fo#) Qkby fd;k x;k && lwpuk dh rkehy dh xbZ && jktLo vf/kdkjh us mlh fnu oknxzLr Hkwfe ij dCtk fd;k && dk;Z vln~Hkkoiw.kZ gS && dCts ds izR;korZu dk vkns‘k U;k;ksrfpr gSA ¿ iSjk 21À
¼12½ flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk] 1908 && vk- 39 fu- 1 rFkk 2 && vkKkid O;kns‘k && okn ls iwoZÙkj fnukad dh ;FkkfLFkfr izR;korZu djus ds fy, iznÙk ugha fd;k tkuk pkfg,A 1973 ts ,y ts 914 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 22À
¼13½ flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk] 1908 && vk- 39 fu- 1 rFkk 2 && vkKkid O;kns‘k dk iznku && dCtk oS/k gksuk gksxk && vfrpkjh O;kns‘k dk gdnkj ugha gSA 1990 ¼1½ e-iz- ohDyh uksV~l 136 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 22À
¼14½ flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk] 1908 && vk- 39 fu- 1 rFkk 2 && okn ds fnukad dks oknh dk igys ls gh dCtk && leu dh rkehy ds i‘pkr~ mlh fnu voS/k :i ls csdCtk fd;k x;k && izfroknhx.k dk dk;Z vlnHkkoiw.kZ fu"df"kZr && dCts ds izR;korZu dk vkns‘k U;k;ksfpr gSA 1990 ¼1½ e-iz- ohDyh uksV~l 37 rFkk 1981 ¼1½ e-iz- ohDyh uksV~l 111 voyafcrA
¿ iSjk 23 ,oa 27À
¼15½ flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk] 1908 && vk- 39 fu- 1 rFkk 2 && izFke–"V~;k ekeys rFkk miHkksx ds vf/kdkj dh fo|ekurk && O;kns‘k ds iznku dh ‘krZ gS && izFke–"V~;k ekeyk] izFke–"V~;k gd ugha gSA , vkb vkj 1993 ,l lh 276 vuqlfjrA ¿ iSjk 24À
¼16½ flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk] 1908 && vk- 39 fu- 1 rFkk 2 && O;kns‘k dk iznku && nkok rqPN vFkok rax djus okyk ugha gksuk pkfg, && xaHkhj iz‘u ij fopkj.k fd;k tkuk gksrk gSA 1978 ts ,y ts 51 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 23À
¼17½ flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk] 1908 && vk- 39 fu- 1 rFkk 2 && vkKkid :i ls vLFkk;h O;kns‘k && fojys ekeyksa esa iznÙk fd;k tk ldrk gS && lkE;k rFkk U;k; dh lgk;rk ds fy, mls lek;ksftr djuk gksrk gSA , vkb vkj 1956 dy- 428 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 26À
1. The appellants/State have preferred this Misc. Appeal under order XLIII Rule 1 of the Code of civil Procedure (for short 'the Code') against the order dated 06.08.1999 passed by District Judge, Shajapurin civil Suit No. 17-A/99 by which the District Judge has granted mandatory injunction against the appellants by giving a direction that the possession over the disputed house alongwith articles be restored back to Respondent No.5 within a period of one month and thereafter the appellants State shall not interfere in the possession of the respondent No.5 till the final disposal of the suit.
2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that on 21.06,1999 Respondents/plaintiffs filed a civil suit for 'declaration and injunction in the Court of District Judge, Shajapur with an application for temporary injunction making a prayer therein for issuance' of temporary injunction against the appellants/defendants restraining them from interfering in the possession of the Respondents/plaintiffs in respect of the suit house. The notices of the application for temporary injunction were issued urgently on the same day i.e, on 21.06.1999. The notices were served on the appellants through the Government pleader on the same day i.e. on 21.06.1999 and the date of hearing was fixed on the next day i.e. 22.06.1999 looking to the urgency in the matter. The case of the Respondents in the suit was that Respondents No. 1 to 4 are the owners of the suit house as the house was inherited to them and a part of that house was given on rent to Respondent No.5. The suit-house is known as "KABUTAR KHAN A". Earlier an Ayurvedic Hospital was being run in the suit house which according to Respondents/plaintiffs was given on rent by Respondents No.1 to 4 to Shankarlal Vaidya and the department was paying rent. Subsequently the said Ayurvedic Hospital was shifted to other building constructed by the Government two years ago and Respondents No.1 to 4 got possession of the suit house from the Vaidya. The construction of this house is about 55 years old and the construction was done by the predecessors of Respondents No. 1 to 4 As such on the date of the filing of the suit, the suit house was in possession of Respondent No.5 as a tenant of respondents No.1 to 4.
3. On 10.06.1999 appellant No. 2 Sub-Divisional Officer (revenue) Shajapur issued a notice to Respondent No. 5 asking him to hand-over the possession of the suit house to the Government as the house belongs to the Government and he is the encroacher and he is using the said Government house for his personal purpose. Therefore, the same should be vacated immediately and he should appear on 21.06.1999 at 11.00 a.m. and to file reply otherwise he shall proceed ex-parte. The case of the Respondent No.5 is that on 21.6.1999 he appeared before the Sub-Divisional Officer and filed his reply of the notice and the case was fixed for hearing on 21.06.1999 which he had noted in the margin of the order-sheet and on the same day i.e. 21.06.99 all the Respondents No. 1 to 5 filed a suit for declaration and injunction before the District Judge, Shajapur and on the same day notices were issued to the appellants/defendants which were served on the Government pleader.
4. That on 21.06.1999 Sub-Divisional Officer passed an order of eviction against Respondent No. 5 and directed the Tahsildar. Shajapur to evict Respondent No.5 and make compliance of his order Immediately a letter was written by the Sub-Divisional-Officer, Shajapur to Tahsildar, Shajapur for taking possession and to submit the compliance report by tomorrow. On the same day i.e. on 21.06.1999 the Revenue Inspector went to village Dupada alongwith patwari and the Police Force. The locks were broken in presence of some persons, articles were removed and a Panchnama was prepared and after taking possession of all the rooms, the house was given in the custody of up-sarpanch Shri Bhagirath Rathore of Gram Panchayat. A Panchnama was also prepared. The Supurdginama was a
SupremeToday
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
