//
archives

eviction proceedings

This tag is associated with 2 posts

writ not maintainable in respect of any property under wakf act=The Act itself provides for an alternative remedy by way of a suit before the Wakf Tribunal constituted under Section 83 of the Act for redressal of any grievance against notice issued under Section 54(3) of the Act. When there are several factual disputes staring in this case as indicated above, it is for the petitioners to approach the Tribunal for redressal by way of filing a civil suit by raising all contentions and inviting the Tribunal for decision on all those factual disputes by leading oral and documentary evidence in support of them. I do not find any valid or legal reasons to entertain this writ petition. =3) Section 54(4) of the Act reads as follows: “(4) Nothing contained in sub-section (3) shall prevent any person aggrieved by the order made by the Chief Executive Officer under that sub-section from instituting a suit in a Tribunal to establish that he has right, title or interest in the land, building, space or other property.”

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU WRIT PETITION No.67 of 2012   DATE: 27.01.2012   Between: Pangaluri Nageswara Rao and 2 others                                              …… Petitioners And The Chief Executive Officer, A.P.State Wakf Board and 2 others …..Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU WRIT PETITION No.67 of 2012 ORDER : … Continue reading

Suit – Eviction suit – Issue regarding title between parties – Recording of finding in favour of plaintiff – Subsequent suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession between the same parties – Effect of earlier suit on the subsequent suit – Held: Finding recorded in favour of the plaintiff in the earlier suit for eviction would operate as res judicata in the subsequent suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession between the parties – Question of title was directly and substantially in issue between the parties in the earlier suit – Res judicata. The plaintiff, mother of the respondents, filed a suit for eviction against the defendant, father of the appellants. The issues were framed regarding the plaintiff’s claim to the title over the suit property and the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. The trial court upheld the plaintiff’s claim to the title but did not grant decree of eviction since the relationship of landlord and tenant was not established between the parties. The appellate court affirmed the order of the trial court. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed another suit against the defendant seeking declaration of title over the property and recovery of its possession from the defendant. The trial court decreed the suit. The defendant filed an appeal and the same was allowed. Thereafter, the plaintiff died and her legal representatives-respondent filed the second appeal. The High Court set aside the judgment and the decree passed by the first appellate court and restored the judgment and the decree of the trial court. Therefore, the appellants filed the instant appeal.

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2579 OF 2004 Md. Nooman & Ors. ….Appellants Versus Md. Jabed Alam & Ors. ….Respondents JUDGMENT AFTAB ALAM, J. 1. A finding on the question of title recorded in a suit for eviction would how far be binding in a subsequent suit for … Continue reading

Blog Stats

  • 2,897,103 hits

ADVOCATE MMMOHAN

archieves

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,907 other followers
Follow advocatemmmohan on WordPress.com