Specific Relief Act, 1963, Section 38 -- Suit for permanent injunction - Restraining defendant/Gram Panchayat from interfering in possession of plaintiff or raising any construction and obstructing plaintiff from using land - Plaintiff along with all co-sharers had made joint request to Gram Panchayat for raising construction of Tharra and Gram Panchayat with its own funds..........
Specific Relief Act, 1963, Section 10, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 2, Rule 2, Evidence Act, 1872, Section 115 -- Suit for specific performance - Barred by estoppel - Plea that earlier suit for permanent injunction stood dismissed - Since in both the suits parties and relief sought are entirely different - Suit not barred by estoppel and bar U.O.2.R.2 CPC also not..........
Specific Relief Act, 1963, Section 38 -- Permanent injunction - Plaintiff claiming title on basis of Will allegedly executed in favour of mother of plaintiff by one `B' - However, no document on record to show ownership of said `B' qua suit property, as such he could not have transferred a valid title to mother of plaintiff and after her death her son including plaintiff..........
Specific Relief Act, 1963, Section 38 -- Suit for permanent prohibitory injunction - Plaintiffs stated that they along with defendant and other co-sharers are joint owners in possession of suit land - However, admission made by DW4 and statements of PWs, defendant and other co-sharer nowhere suggest that suit land is still joint amongst parties - Rather, sale deed which..........
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 9, Rule 9 -- Suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction on the basis of Will - Suit dismissed in default - Second suit for permanent injunction on the basis of Will - Held, second suit is barred U.O.9.R.9 CPC...........
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 11 -- Res judicata - Three separate suits were filed by plaintiff for declaration of title and permanent injunction against defendants including State - First two suits were dismissed and plaintiffs filed appeal in both the suits - Issue of title thus, not attained finality - Findings recorded in first and second suit will not operate as..........
Specific Relief Act, 1963, Section 34, 38 -- Suit for declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction - Admittedly, defendant did not appear in the witness box but since the plaintiff has failed to prove his case mere fact that defendant did not appear in the witness box is of no avail especially when his son who was acquainted with the facts of the case and was duly..........
Specific Relief Act, 1963, Section 34, 38 -- Suit for declaration and permanent injunction in respect of electric motor connection - Plaintiff became co-owner to the extent of 2/3rd share in land previously owned by deceased on the basis of consent decree - There is no reference to electric motor connection in question which was sanctioned in the name of deceased, as such..........
Specific Relief Act, 1963, Section 38 -- Permanent injunction - Restraining defendants from cutting mango tree and removing sheesham tree wood lying on the spot - Boundary dispute between parties - Local Commissioner submitted its report wherein it was found that mango tree was standing on land of defendants - As regard sheesham tree wood, since there was no stump found at..........
Limitation Act, 1963, Section 5, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 100, 151 -- Condonation of delay - Delay of 1889 days in filing second appeal - Suit for declaration and permanent injunction - Delay in the case is more than 5 years - No satisfactory or plausible explanation rendered, which might have been taken into consideration to condone delay - Moreover,..........
