Total Pageviews

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963

SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963
S.6--Encroachment--Possession--Title--Bahi Entry--Defendant claiming title on basis of writing in bahi not proved--Defendant claiming to purchase suit land for Rs.800/- but no sale deed was registered--He has no title over suit plot--Even if specific part of khasra claimed by plaintiff did not fall to his share in mutual partition but plaintiff would still remain co-sharer in entire khasra and can claim possession from defendant who is trespasser--Some minor contradiction or discrepancy regarding date or month of taking possession by defendant would not disentitle plaintiff to relief of possession when his claim is based on title.; Dharambir & Ors. v. Chet Ram ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 716
S.28--Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.148--Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.21, R.34(2)--Extension of time for deposit of balance sale amount--Suit filed by DH was decreed by the trial court on 21.4.1987--DH was required to deposit the balance amount within two months thereof--DH accordingly deposited the same on 18.5.1987--Said amount remained deposited with the executing court for more than a year--Said amount was withdrawn by DH with permission of the court apparently in the year 1989 when execution petition was adjourned sine die in view of interim stay granted by High Court in second appeal--After final decision of the second appeal by High Court vide judgment dated 22.12.1995, both the parties agitated the matter before the Hon’ble Apex Court by filing SLPs--After the SLPs were also dismissed the DH filed application dated 2.4.1997 for revival of the execution petition which had earlier been adjourned sine die--However, DH died on 26.5.1997--His LRs thereafter moved application on 7.8.1997 in the executing court under section 148 CPC for extension of time--Pursuant to order dated 4.9.1997 passed by the executing court, the decree holder deposited the balance amount on 14.10.1997--In this manner the executing court is deemed to have granted extension of time to the decree holder for deposit of the balance sale price--DH made sufficient ground for extension of time.; Rai Singh v. Mohinder Singh tho. LRs.; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 701
S.28--Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.148--Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.21, R.34(2)--Suit decreed for specific performance--Extension of time for deposit of balance sale amount--DH secured the decree which was upheld upto High Court--Rights of the decree holder under the decree cannot be disturbed merely because there was some delay in deposit of balance sale price particularly because the DH had earlier also deposited the balance sale price pursuant to decree of the trial court and the said amount remained deposited with the court for more than a year.; Rai Singh v. Mohinder Singh tho. LRs.; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 701
S.34--Permanent Injunction--Possession--Without giving finding regarding possession relief of injunction could not have been granted--Consequent finding regarding possession of plaintiff cannot be deemed to be relief of declaration.; Gurmail Ram & Ors. v. Amrik Singh ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 649
S.34--Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887, S.111--Permanent Injunction--Memorandum of Partition--Entry in Jamabandi--Correctness of--Memorandum of partition reveals that plaintiff and defendant no.1 got 4 kanals land each out of Killa no.22//10--Said document pleaded by defendants fully rebuts presumption of correctness attached to entry in Jamabandi in which defendant was shown to be in possession of 5 kanals land of Killa no.22//10 min whereas plaintiff shown to be in possession of 3 Kanals land of Killa no.22//10 min--Moreover, defendants themselves pleaded their possession over 4 kanals land only out of Killa no.22//10--Defendant now cannot plead that he is in possession of 5 kanals land out of killa no.10--Amendment filed by defendant pleading possession of defendant over 5 kanals of land in stead of 4 kanals out of killa no. 10 not allowed--Suit of plaintiff rightly decreed in respect of 4 kanals land of killa no.22//10 min.; Gurmail Ram & Ors. v. Amrik Singh ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 649