2026 INSC 199 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 @ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 9558 OF 2023 THE GENERAL SECRETARY, VIVEKANANDA KENDRA … APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS PRADEEP KUMAR AGARWALLA AND OTHERS … RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T

S.V.N. BHATTI, J.

1. Leave Granted.

2. We have heard Mr. Rutwik Panda, learned Counsel for the Appellant, and Mr. Ashok Panigrahi, learned Senior Counsel, for the Respondents.

3. The Civil Appeal arises from the judgment and decree dated 23.12.2022 in RSA No. 123 of 2021 (for short, “impugned judgment”) in the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack. The Plaintiff in the Civil Suit No. 100/524 of 2011-2005 (for short, “Civil Suit”) before the Court of Civil Judge, Baripada, is the Appellant. Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are Defendant Nos. 3, 4, and 2, respectively, in the Civil Suit.

4. The subject matter of the Civil Appeal is described in Schedule – ‘A’ of Signature Not Verified LOKESH AtRhOReA plaint, which is detailed as below (for short, “Plaint Schedule Property”):

Date: 2026.02.26 Reason:

“SCHEDULE – ‘A’

The land situated in Mouza - Baripada town Ward No.4 (Golapbag) under Baripada town Police station recorded in the name of the anima Bose under Khata No.6.

Plot No. Kisam Area 203 Gharabari-I Ac. 0.070 decimals”

5. Anima Bose was the owner and the possessor of the Plaint Schedule Property. She was associated with the objectives and ideals of the Vivekananda Kendra, Kanyakumari. Anima Bose died on 07.03.2007. For the present, it is apposite to refer to a few dates and events preceding the filing of the Civil Suit.

6. On 23.03.1998, during the lifetime, Late Anima Bose, executed Exhibit 1 (For short, “Ext. 1”), termed as a “lease deed” in favour of the Vivekananda Kendra. The salient features of the lease deed are that Anima Bose, in her capacity as the owner, intended to lease the Plaint Schedule Property to the lessee/Vivekananda Kendra. Late Anima Bose recognised the reason for which the Plaint Schedule Property is put in possession of the Kendra, i.e., for the purpose of having a centre of the Vivekananda Kendra, and to carry out the aims and objects as per its memorandum of rules and guidelines. The lease is for 99 years. Anima Bose set out the rent at Rs. 1,000 per annum. The Kendra claims to have set up a branch centre at the subject Plaint Schedule Property. On 03.12.2003, Anima Bose cancelled the registered lease deed dated 23.03.1998. Vide notice dated 14.12.2003, she called upon the Kendra to surrender vacant possession of the Plaint Schedule Property. The Kendra, on 02.01.2004, replied, asserting its right to continue for 99 years under the lease deed dated 23.03.1998. Anima Bose, on 03.05.2005, executed a Power of Attorney in favour of Sujit Kumar Mohanty. The Vivekananda Kendra admits that on 09.05.2005, its possession was forcibly disturbed and taken. Anima Bose, represented by her Power of Attorney: Sujit Kumar Mohanty, executed a sale deed dated 17.01.2006, in favour of Pradeep Kumar Agarwalla and Ratandeep Agarwalla.

7. Vivekananda Kendra/Plaintiff filed a Civil Suit against Anima Bose/Defendant No. 1, Sujit Kumar Mohanty/Defendant No. 2, Pradeep Kumar Agarwalla/Defendant No. 3 and Ratandeep Agarwalla/Defendant No. 4. The Civil Suit is filed for the declaration of Plaintiff’s leasehold rights, recovery of possession, and a mandatory injunction. The averments in the plaint are summed up and stated thus:

7.1 The Plaint Schedule Property, admittedly owned by Defendant No. 1, was initially leased to the Plaintiff by Defendant No. 1 via a registered 99-year Lease Deed No. 890 dated 23.03.1998, under which the Plaintiff carried out spiritual and service activities and made constructions like the Ashram Building.

7.2 However, Defendant No. 1 unilaterally executed a Deed of Cancellation of Lease bearing No. 3387 of 2003 on 03.12.2003, allegedly due to prolonged illness, loss of mental stability, and the fraudulent management of her relatives.

7.3 S