Disposed

Ramdev D. Vishwakarma v. the Principal, Holy Angel High School and 5 Ors.

Bombay HC14 Aug 2012APP/492/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In civil appeal, the High Court of Bombay held that a trustee-holding individual capacity cannot claim title over government land when the trust is established trespasser. Court directed respondent school to deposit amount with surveyor for land survey.

What did the court decide?

Respondent directed to deposit amount with City Survey Officer within two weeks for survey of suit land.

Ramdev D. Vishwakarma Vs the Principal, Holy Angel High… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

app-l-591-12.sxw

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

APPEAL (LODGING) NO.591 OF 2012 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1972 OF 2010 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2312 OF 2010 IN

¶4

SUIT NO.2003 OF 2010

¶5

Ramdev D. Vishwakarma Versus The Principal, Holy Angel High School and others.

¶6

... Appellant

¶7

... Respondents

¶8

Mr.Mukesh Subramaniam i/by Mr.Jeetendra H. Ramugade for the appellant. Mr.J.M.D'Silva for respondent No.1.

¶9

Ms. Anjali Helekar for respondent Nos.2 to 6.

¶10

CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & N.M. JAMDAR, J.

¶11

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

¶12

P .C.

¶13

This appeal is directed against the order dated 25 July 2012 of the learned Single Judge dismissing the appellant-plaintiff's notice of motion seeking injunction restraining defendant No.1 from encroaching upon the land of Vishwakarma Education Trust to which plaintiff is in possession. According to the plaintiff, the plaintiff has been forcibly dispossessed by defendant No.1.

¶14

According to the defendants, the plaintiff is a trustee of Vishwakarma Education Trust. Vishwakarma Education Trust had filed suit No.2688 of 2008 by which it had sought injunction to restrain the authorities from disturbing the possession of Vishwakarma Education Trust from the suit

¶15

SRK 1 of 3

¶16

app-l-591-12.sxw

¶17

land. That notice of motion came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 3 December 2008 on the ground that the suit property admittedly vested in the first defendant by the State of Maharashtra and that no order for allotment of the property in favour of the plaintiff was passed. Hence, the plaintiff had no right in respect of the suit property. The appeal filed against the same order being Appeal No.55 of 2009 was withdrawn on 11 December 2009. Thereafter, Vishwakarma Education Trust filed Writ Petition No. 687 of 2011 which also came to be dismissed on the ground that Vishwakarma Education Trust claimed to be in possession of plot of land which belonged to the Government, but the Trust had encroached upon the Government land and, therefore, Vishwakarma Education Trust did not get any relief from the Court.

¶18

In view of the above history, it is clear that the present plaintiff who is trustee of Vishwakarma Education Trust, which trust has been held to be the trespasser, cannot claim any right over the suit land merely because the plaintiff has now came to the Court in his individual capacity. Admittedly the plaintiff has not been able to show any title to the land in question. On the other hand, defendant No.1 has been allotted some land for the purposes of constructing a school building. If the plaintiff's case will have to be believed, defendant No.1 has encroached upon the suit land belonging to the Government. If that be so, it is for the Government to look into the matter and consider whether any action is required to be taken against defendant No.1 for alleged encroachment over the suit land to which the plaintiff has no right.

¶19

Before parting with the matter, we may note that this Court had passed order dated 8 May 2012 in Notice of Motion No.1972 of 2010 under which the City Survey Officer, Goregaon was to carry out survey of the suit land. No action appears to have taken on the basis of the said order dated 8

2 of 3

SRK

app-l-591-12.sxw

May 2012 as defendant No.1 did not deposit the requisite amount with the City Survey Officer. In order to ensure that there is no confusion or uncertainty about the said land allotted to defendant No.1 and the land in possession of defendant No.1, we direct that the order dated 8 May 2012 of the learned Single Judge (S.J.Kathawalla, J.) in Notice of Motion No.1972 of 2010 shall be implemented and for that purpose, defendant No.1- Holy angel School shall deposit the necessary amount with the City Survey Officer within two weeks from today. The City Survey Officer shall thereafter carry out the survey within six weeks and place the same on the record of Suit No.2003 of 2010 and also send a true xerox copy to the Collector.

¶24

Appeal stands disposed of.

CHIEF JUSTICE

N.M. JAMDAR , J .

3 of 3

SRK

Ramdev D. Vishwakarma v. the Principal, Holy Angel High School and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramdev D. Vishwakarma v. the Principal, Holy Angel High School and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raghu B.Pujari Vs Jamuna Ramlal Yadav and Anr.

M/S. Videocon Industries Limited, Vs M/S. Whirlpool of India Limited

Afak Anwar Mandaviya. Vs Dean of Sion Hospital Ms. Sandya Kamat and 5 Ors.

Susme Builders Private Limited Vs Chief Executive Officer and Anr.

Shri. Pandurang Narayan Bhoir and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Govt of Maha. Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Alim Abu Aker Chagla Vs State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Home Dept and Ors.