MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
P. K. Jaiswal and Jarat Kumar Jain, JJ.
Pramod Kumar Goel and another v. State of M.P. and others
Writ Petitions No.4414 and 5998 of 2014 (Indore); Decided on 25.1.2016.
¼2½ Hkkjr dk lafo/kku & vuq-226 & uxjikfyd fuxe dh Hkwfe & izR;FkhZ Øekad 4 }kjk vius HkkbZ ds i{k esa Hkwfe foØ; dh & nks la'kksf/kr foys[kksa }kjk & [kljk Øekad ,oa xzke dk uke ifjofrZr fd;k x;k & uxjikfyd fuxe dh vuqefr ds fcuk & dqN fuekZ.k fd;k x;k & ,slk vf/kØe.k gVkus ds fy, yksdfgr eqdnek ds :i esa fjV ;kfpdk & izR;FkhZ Øekad 4 }kjk vius fof/kd gd ds fo"k; esa dksbZ nLrkost izLrqr ugha fd;k x;k & ,slk vf/kØe.k gVkus ds fy, izR;FkhZx.k izkf/kdkjh funsf'krA ¼2006½7 Ldsy 41 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 12] 13] 14 ,oa 16
¼3½ Hkw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-iz-½ & /kkjk 248 & uxjikfyd fuxe dh Hkwfe & izR;FkhZ Øekad 4 }kjk vius HkkbZ ds i{k esa Hkwfe foØ; foys[k fu"ikfnr & uxjikfyd fuxe dh vuqefr ds fcuk & ,slh Hkwfe ij dqN fuekZ.k fd;k x;k & izR;FkhZ Øekad 4 }kjk vius fof/kd gd~ ds fo"k; esa dksbZ nLrkost izLrqr ugha fd;k x;k & ,slk dCtk vf/kØked ds :i esa gS & mls gVk;k tkuk funsf'krA ¼iSjk 12] 13] 14 ,oa 16
¼4½ Hkw&jktLo lafgrk] 1959 ¼e-iz-½ & /kkjk 109 rFkk 110 & uxjikfyd fuxe dh Hkwfe & uxjikfyd fuxe dks i{kdkj cuk, fcuk & izkbosV O;fDr ds uke ukekarj.k & ,slk vkns'k uxjikfyd fuxe ij vkc)dj ugha gSA ¼iSjk 12
(1) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M.P.) -- Ss.109, 110, 115 and 116 -- jurisdiction under -- Government or Municipal land -- Tahsildar has no jurisdiction to decide title or record ownership or possession of any private person on such land. [Para 11
(2) Constitution of India -- Art.226 -- land belong to Municipal Corporation -- sold by respondent No.4 in favour of his brother -- by two amended deeds -- survey number and name of village changed -- without any permission of Municipal Corporation -- some construction made -- writ petition as PIL for removing such encroachment -- no document filed by respondent No.4 in respect of his legal title -- respondents authorities directed for removing such encroachment. (2006)7 Scale 41 referred to. [Paras 12, 13, 14 & 16
(3) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M.P.) -- S.248 -- land belongs to Municipal Corporation -- without any title -- sale deed executed by respondent No.4 in favour of his brother -- without permission of Municipal Corporation -- some construction made on such land -- respondent No.4 not produced any document in respect of his legal title -- such possession is as encroacher -- same directed to be removed. [Paras 12, 13, 14 & 16
(4) Land Revenue Code, 1959 (M.P.) -- Ss.109 and 110 -- land belongs to Municipal Corporation -- without impleading Municipal Corporation -- mutation in name of private person -- such order is not binding upon Municipal Corporation. [Para 12
Jaiswal, J. -- 1. In Writ Petition No.4414/2012, filed in public interest, petitioners, claiming to be public spirited citizens prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents No.2 and 3 to remove the illegal encroachment of respondent No.4 from the land bearing survey No.269/1 of village – Palasia Hana Indore. They also prayed for writ of prohibition directing the respondent No.3 to ensure that no illegal construction or unauthorized construction is raised and to take proper and effective steps for removal of such illegal and unauthorized construction, if already made or is being made, on the ground that it is an illegal and against public interest.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the land bearing Survey Nos.269/1 and 269/2, are the land of Municipal Corporation, Indore, as is evident from Khasra Panchshala 1973-74 (Annexure P-4) and revenue records upto 2013-14 (Annexure P-4). One Vallabh Malviya son of Ganga Bishan Malviya, real brother of Rajesh Ganga Bishan Malviya (respondent No.4) on 27.3.1998, executed sale deed (Annexure P-5) in favour of his brother – Rajesh Malviya (respondent No.4.) in respect of 2900 sq. fts of Survey No.269, for a consideration of Rs.1,00,000/-. On 27.3.2005 a corrigendum (amended deed) to the sale deed dated 27.9.1998 was executed by Shri Vallabh Malviya, in favour of respondent No.4 – Rajesh Malviya (Writ petitioner in Writ P.No.5998/2014). By this amendment in place of survey No.269, Khajrana Kankad, Indore, the Survey No.264, village Palasiya Hana, Indore has been mentioned. Clause “A” and “B” is sale deed (Annexure P-6) :-
^^¼,½ ;g fd] foØsrk us iathd`r foØ; foys[k Øekad 1v@6078@1998] fnukad 28-3-1998 ds }kjk vius LokfeRo dh laifÙk tks fd xzke & iykfl;kgkuk ds losZ uacj 264] isfd Hkkx 2900 oxZQhV ij fLFkr Fkh] Øsrk dks foØ; dh Fkh rFkk blds izfrQy dh lEiw.kZ /kujkf'k Øsrk ls izkIr djds bldk fjDr vkf/kiR; Øsrk dks rRle; gh ekSds ij ns fn;k x;kA ¼ch½ ;g fd] fyfidh; =qfV ,oa Vk;fiax dh Hkwyo'k mDr foØ; foys[k ds pj.k 1 esa foØhr laifÙk ^^[kljk uacj 269] [ktjkuh dkdM] bUnkSj^^ Vkbi gks x;k Fkk tcfd okLrfod :i ls foØhr laifÙk ^^[kljk uEcj 264] xzke iykfl;kgkuk] bUnkSj^^ ij gSA laifÙk dk lEiw.kZ fooj.k layXu vuqlwph esa fn;k x;k gSA**
3. On 31.12.2010 another corrigendum (amended deed) was executed by Shri Vallabh Malviya “son of Ganga Bishan Malviya, in favour of Ratnesh @ Rajesh Malviya son of Vallabh Malviya, through power of attorney Sri Shri Vallabh Malviya son of Ganga Bishan Malviya. By this second amended deed, the number of survey land as well as name of the father of the respondent No.4 was also changed. Paras 6 to 11 of the amended sale deed dated 31.12.2010, which has been executed after a period of more than 12 years from the original sale deed reads as under :
^^6- izFkei{k ds }kjk] f}rh;i{k ds fgr esa fu"ikfnr ,oa iathd`r foØ; ys[k Øekad 1v@6078 ¼,p½ ds i`"B Øekad 2 ds pj.k Øekad 1 dh f}rh; iafDr esa Hkwyo'k ,oa Vad.k =qfV ds QyLo:i xzke iyklh;k gkuk ds LFkku ij [ktjkuk dkadM Vafdr gksdj mYysf[kr gqvk gSA 7- izFkei{k ,oa f}rh;i{k us fu"ikfnr la'kks/ku ys[k esa mfpr ,oa lgh xzke LFkku ds leFkZu esa ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky;] e-iz- bUnkSj ds }kjk fd;s x, dfe'uj egksn; ds }kjk iznRr dh xbZ dfe'ulZ fjikVZ dh Nk;kizfr layXu dh gSA 8- izFkei{k ,oa f}rh;i{k us fu"ikfnr la'kks/ku ys[k esa mfpr ,oa lgh xzke LFkku ds leFkZu esa ljiap xzke iapk;r [ktjkuk ftyk bankSj ds fnukad 18-7-1971 ds nk[kyk dh Nk;kizfr layXu dh gSA 9- izFkei{k ,oa f}rh;i{k us fu"ikfnr la'kks/ku ys[k esa mfpr ,oa lgh xzke LFkku ds leFkZu esa fnukad 20-12-2005 ds ekSdk iapukek dh Nk;kizfr layXu dh gSA 10- izFkei{k ,oa f}rh;i{k us fu"ikfnr la'kks/ku ys[k esa mfpr ,oa lgh xzke LFkku ds leFkZu esa fnukad 25-2-2006 ds ekSdk iapukek dh Nk;kizfr layXu dh gSA 11- izFkei{k ,oa f}rh;i{k us fu"ikfnr la'kks/ku ys[k esa mfpr ,oa lgh xzke LFkku ds leFkZu esa iVokjh egksn; ds lR;kfir V
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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.