Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.K. AGRAWAL, ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, JJ.
M/s Eureka Builders & Ors. – Appellant(s)
Versus
Gulabchand s/o Veljee Dand Since Deceased by L.Rs. & Ors.Etc.Etc. – Respondent(s)
CIVIL APPERAL Nos. 4757-4760 OF 2018 [Arising out of SLP (C) No.32252-32255 of 2016]
Decided On 03-05-2018
(b) Property law – Original land holders parting with suit land through court auction and direct sale – Secondly, their two suits asserting their ownership rights over the suit land against the present plaintiff and others dismissed and the dismissal attaining finality – Held original land holders not having any subsisting rights, title and interest in suit land – Therefore appellant claiming through them cannot have any rights, title and interest in the suit land. (Para 49, 53)
(c) Property law – Limitation – Section 27, Articles 64, 65, Schedule, Limitation Act, 1963 – Re-grant of land – Grantee required to file suit for declaration of possession and rights within 12 years – Not doing so extinguishes the rights conferred by re-grant. (Para 63)
(d) Property law – Re-grant of land to original land holder – No suit filed by grantee – No adjudication of his rights as against other stake holders – Appellant claiming through original land holder not entitled to any relief. (Para 78)
Facts of the case:
The suit land originally belonged to three persons namely, Marigouda Patil, Basangouda Patil and Adveppagouda Patil (“three PATIL”).
On 23.10.1915, three PATIL leased out land bearing CTS No. 366 (3 acres 20 guntas) to one Chaturbhuj Ratansi for a period of 50 years whereas the land bearing CTS No. 361 (1 acre 25 guntas) was permanently leased out to one Kanjee Ghelabhai Shet alias Gujjar on 09.03.1920.
In 1942, land bearing CTS No.361 was sold in Court Auction proceedings and one person by name – Shah Veljee Kanjee purchased the said land being the highest bidder.
On 14.05.1943, Shah Veljee Kanjee purchased another parcel of land bearing CTS No.366 by direct sale/purchase. Shah Veljee Kanjee died on 02.12.1957 leaving behind his widow-Gunwantibai, two major daughters and four minor sons. By inheritance, the legal representatives stepped into his shoes and became the joint owners of the suit land.
On 19.12.1957, the widow and 2 major daughters of late Shah Veljee Kanjee sold the suit land to one Gadag Co-operative Cotton Sales Society Ltd.-defendant No. 17.
The son of late Shah Veljee Kanjee, who is plaintiff (since dead) and defendant Nos. 1 to 4 in the present suit filed civil suit being O.S. No.9/1969 for a declaration that the sale made by their mother and two sisters is bad in law and void to the extent of plaintiff's share (5/8th) in the suit land. This suit was decreed in plaintiff's favour. This decree has became final.
In execution of this decree, the plaintiff and defendant Nos.1-4, who are the legal representatives of late Shah Veljee Kanjee, were accordingly placed in joint possession of their shares in the suit land.
One son of Shah Veljee Kanjee (respondent No.1 herein (since dead) and represented by his legal representatives son/daughter as respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed civil suit (O.S.No.37/2010) on 23.02.2010 against 27 defendants which included the members of Shah Veljee Kanjee family, their legal heirs, legal representatives of original holders (three PATIL) and two intending purchasers/buyers of the suit land, namely, Society and the other, M/s Eureka builders -a firm and their partners (appellants herein).
The suit was filed for partition and separate possession of plaintiff's 1/5th share in the suit land and also for grant of permanent injunction restraining the two intending buyers/purchasers of the suit land from interfering in plaintiff's possession over the suit land.
The suit was decreed in part and the preliminary decree of partition and separate possession in relation to the suit land in plaintiff's favour was passed as prayed.
The plaintiff, the legal representatives of defendant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 and defendant No. 17 Society filed four separate first appeals in the High Court.
The present appellants did not prefer any appeal.
The High Court allowed the appeal filed by the plaintiff and accordingly modified the finding of the Trial Court as regards the status and the ownership rights of the plaintiff in the suit land and held that the plaintiff is the owner of the suit land and is, therefore, entitled to claim his 1/5th share in the suit land along with defendants, who are legal representatives of late Shah Veljee Kanjee like the plaintiff.
Finding of the Court:
Appellant not entitled to any relief.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.
1) Leave granted.
2) These appeals arise from the common final judgment and order dated 30.09.2015 passed by the High Court of Karnataka, Circuit Bench at Dharwad in R.F.A. Nos.100017 of 2015, 100018 of 2015, 100016 of 2015 and 100099 of 2015, whereby the Division Bench of the High Court disposed of the appeals by allowing the plaintiff’s appeal and accordingly modified the finding of the Trial Court as regards the status and the ownership rights of the plaintiff in the suit land and held that the plaintiff is the owner of the suit land and is, therefore, entitled to claim his 1/5th share in it along with defendants Nos.1 to 4, who are legal representatives of late Shah Veljee Kanjee.
3) In order to appreciate the issues involved in these appeals, it is necessary to set out the background facts, which led to filing of the suit by the predecessor-in-title of respondent Nos.1 and 2 and now represented by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 against the appellants and remaining respondents No.3 to 34 herein out of which these appeals arise.
4) The case has a history of litigation as it would be clear from the narration of the facts stated hereinbelow. The facts mentioned hereinbelow are taken from SLP paper books and its list of dates.
5) The appellants herein are defendant Nos. 18 to 25 (who are builder, firm and its partners) whereas respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are the legal representatives of original plaintiff and respondent Nos. 3 to 34 are proforma defendants in a civil suit (O.S. No.37/2010) out of which these appeals arise. The contest in these appeals is essentially among the appellants and respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
6) The dispute relates to a land bearing CTS Nos. 361 and 366 of CTS Ward No.1 (originally bearing RS Nos. 20/1/& 20/2 admeasuring 3 Acres 20 Guntas and 1 Acre 25 Guntas respectively) situated at Kusugal Road, Keshwapur, Hubli described in detail in the schedule to the plaint (hereinafter referred to as "the suit land").
7) The suit land was a "watan" property under the Maharashtra Hereditary Offices Act (hereinafter referred to as “the MHO Act”) and on its repeal in 1961, was governed by the Karnataka Village Abolition Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the KVA Act”).
8) The suit land originally belonged to three persons namely, Marigouda Patil, Basangouda Patil and Adveppagouda Patil (hereinafter referred to as “three PATIL”).
9) On 23.10.1915, three PATIL leased out land bearing CTS No. 366 (3 acres 20 guntas) to one Chaturbhuj Ratansi for a period of 50 years whereas the land bearing CTS No. 361 (1 acre 25 guntas) was permanently leased out to one Kanjee Ghelabhai Shet alias Gujjar on 09.03.1920.
10) In 1942, land bearing CTS No.361 was sold in Court Auction proceedings and one person by name – Shah Veljee Kanjee purchased the said land being the highest bidder.
11) On 14.05.1943, Shah Veljee Kanjee purchased another parcel of land bearing CTS No.366 by direct sale/purchase. Shah Veljee Kanjee died on 02.12.1957 leaving behind his widow-Gunwantibai, two major daughters and four minor sons. By inheritance, the legal representatives stepped into his shoes and became the joint owners of the suit land.
12) On 19.12.1957, the widow and 2 major daughters of late Shah Veljee Kanjee sold the suit land to one Gadag Co-operative Cotton Sales Society Ltd.-defendant No. 17 (hereinafter referred to as the “Society”).
13) The son of late Shah Veljee Kanjee, who is plaintiff (since dead) and defendant Nos. 1 to 4 in the present suit out of which these appeals arise felt aggrieved by the sale dated 19.12.1957 made by their mother and two sisters in favour of the Society and accordingly filed civil suit being O.S. No.9/1969 praying therein for a declaration that the sale made by their mother and two sisters is bad in law and void to the extent of plaintiff's share (5/8th) in the suit land. The mother, two sisters and the Society contested the suit as defendants.
14) This suit was, however, decreed on 26.08.1977 by
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
