Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + DSC Companies Law - 2017 (3) TMI DSC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 1853 - DSC - Companies LawSeeking recovery of possession of land - mutation of the suit - defendant by taking advantage of absence of the plaintiff’s company illegally and unauthorizedly trespassed and occupied the suit land and illegally got his name mutated in the records of rights - maintainability of suit - whether the learned Trial Court had rightly decided the issue No.1 in the negative against the plaintiff/appellant? - HELD THAT:- It is held that the plaintiff company was in existence on the day of filing of the instant suit. It is also held that the suit has been filed within the period of limitation. However, it is held that the suit has not been instituted by the authorized person of the Company. The suit is accordingly held to be not maintainable. The decision of the learned Trial Court in respect of issue no.1 is accordingly partly modified and held that the suit is not maintainable. Whether the learned Trial Court rightly held that plaintiff has right, title and interest over the suit land? - HELD THAT:- The plaintiff failed to prove the execution of the Sale Deed(Exhibit-3). The Sale Deed exhibit-3 did not complete 30 years on the day it was filed in Court and even on the day it was tendered as evidence. Even otherwise, the presumption under section 90 Evidence Act does not absolve the plaintiff of his burden to prove title over the suit land on the strength of the Sale deed, as required under the law - the learned Trial Court in Issue No.2 is accordingly set aside and it is held that the plaintiff has no right, title and interest over the suit land. Uninterrupted continuous peaceful possession and occupation of the suit land - HELD THAT:- The defendant Sri Parag Gogoi as DW1 has exhibited the certified copy of Jamabandi of P.P No.21 dated 03.02.2000 as Ext.A, the possession certificate dated 07.02.1996 in respect of the suit land as Ext.B, the land revenue receipts w.e.f 1995 to 2009 as Ext. Nos.J to U, construction permission of TDA dated 07.03.2000 as Ext.X. The possession of the defendant over the suit land has been admitted by the plaintiff also. As the plaintiff has failed to prove his right, title and interest over the suit land and as the instant suit is not maintainable, he is not entitled to recover the possession of the suit land from the defendant - The decision of the learned Trial Court in Issue No.3 is affirmed. Right, title and interest over the suit land - HELD THAT:- As the suit of the plaintiff is held to be not maintainable and as the plaintiff has failed to prove his right, title and interest over the suit land, the plaintiff is not entitled to the reliefs prayed for. And as the defendant has not prayed for any relief in the suit, the question of granting relief to the defendant does not arise. The plaintiff company was in existence at the time of filing the suit and that the suit has been filed within the period of limitation, but it is held that the suit has not been filed by the authorized person of the plaintiff company. The ultimate decision of the learned Trial Court in holding the suit as not-maintainable is affirmed. The appellant is not entitled to any relief - The appeal is dismissed.
|