Feedback   New User   Subscription   Demo   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

D.M. Deshpande & Ors. Versus Shri Janardhan Kashinath Kadam (Dead) by Lrs. & Ors.

1998 (11) TMI 686 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

C.A. Nos. 4441-4442 of 1990 - Dated:- 12-11-1998 - S.V. Manohar and A.P. Misra ORDER 1. The appellants 1 to 3 are the trustees of appellant No. 4 which is a public Trust registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The second respondent is a former trustee of the said Trust while the first respondent claims to be a tenant of the lands belonging to the said Trust. The land in dispute is Survey No. 14 situated at Warud Walidatpur, Yavatmal, which belongs to the said Trust. The present proc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. 1980 in suo motu proceedings. He ordered substitution of certain new trustees by removing earlier trustees. 3. The second respondent, by this order was removed as a trustee and he was directed to handover possession of the Trust property as well as management of the Trust to the trustees appointed under the order of 24th of Oct., 1980. Since the second respondent did not handover possession of the properties of the said Trust which consisted of the said land bearing Survey No. 14 and also did .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

i.e. appellants 1 to 3, who were the trustees at the material time, filed a Regular Execution Application No. 98/84 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Yavatmal against the respondents praying for execution of the said scheme and asking for possession of land bearing Survey No. 14 from the respondents. On notice being issued, the respondents appeared in the Execution Proceedings. The respondents in the Execution Proceedings filed joint application dated 17th of January, 1985 being .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

"moreover the non-applicant No. 2 is a tenant over the said field Survey No. 14 of Walidatpur and he is entitled to retain possession of the said land till the eviction order from Tenancy Court. Even the District Court has no jurisdiction to try any suit for possession against him". There are no particulars mentioned in this application as to when this alleged tenancy was created in favour of non-applicant No. 2, that is to say, the present 1st respondent. No date of creation of tenan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

respondents only to defraud the Trust of this property. It was also submitted by the appellants that since Respondent No. 2 was removed as a trustee of the said Trust, an attempt was being made to claim rights over the Trust property in the form of an alleged tenancy in favour of the brother-in-law of the removed trustee- Respondent No. 2. 5. This application of the respondents was rejected by the Executing Court by its order of 3rd of May, 1985. Thereafter, the decree was executed and on 15.6. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion that the scheme could be validly executed as a decree. However, the Court went on to hold that the issue of tenancy arises and should be referred to the Tehsildar Under Section 125 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidharbha Region) Act, 1958. The High Court has further directed that the Trust should handover possession of the said land to the 1st respondent. 7. The present appeal has been filed by the appellants challenging that portion of the order of the High Court which direc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

particulars relating to this alleged tenancy of the 1st respondent have been submitted anywhere in the application (Exhibit 8) before the Executing Court. In the absence of any material particulars relating to this alleged claim of tenancy, no issue could have been framed or referred to the Tehsildar. A bare statement claiming tenancy is not enough for the purpose of raising an issue relating to the alleged tenancy of the 1st respondent. The appellants have relied upon Order 6 Rule 11 of the Ci .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n this connection a reference was made to Ram Sarup Gupta v. Bishun Narain Inter College and Ors., [1987]2SCR805 , where this Court has held that all necessary and material facts should be pleaded by the party in support of the case set up by it. In the absence of pleading, evidence if any, produced by the parties cannot be considered. The object and purpose of a pleading is to enable the adversary party to know the case of the opponent. ' In order to have a fair trial it is imperative that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

esh Construction Company and Anr. v. Gangubai and Ors., AIR1982Bom491 , the Court observed that before a reference to the Mamlatdar for deciding the issue of tenancy under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 is made the alleged tenant, must disclose in his pleadings, details about the tenancy and the exact nature of the right which is claimed by him. An issue of tenancy cannot be raised on a vague plea. 10. Similarly in an earlier case of Pandu Dhondi Yerudkar v. Ananda Krishna P .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version