In a second appeal regarding a suit for permanent injunction, the High Court held that a plaintiff cannot claim rights over a motor pump set and electricity service connection if the vendors lacked the title to convey them, overruling the first appellate court.
The decree dated 21.02.2011 in the first appeal was set aside, and the suit was dismissed with costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.04.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTIC E R.HEMALATHA
S.A.NO.959 OF 2011 AND M.P.NO.1 OF 2011
1.C.Krishnan 2.C.Kandiban 3.C.Babu ...Appellants / Respondents / Defendants
Vs.
M.Krishnan ...Respondent / Appellant / Plaintiff
Prayer : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 CPC, 1908 against the decree and judgment dated 21.02.2011 passed in A.S. No.49 of 2009, on the file of the Subordinate Court, Ranipet, reversing the decree and judgment dated 29.07.2009 passed in O.S. No.101 of 2005, on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Arcot.
For Appellants : Mr.P.Mani
For Respondent : Mrs.V.Srimathi
JUDGMENT
The appellants are the defendants in O.S. No.101/2005, on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Arcot. The respondent/plaintiff filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the appellants / defendants from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property.
The plaintiff owns 1.38 acres out of 4.39 acres in Survey No.171/2H (old Survey No.172/2), Kilminnel Village, Walajah Taluk, Vellore District. He claims tagged share of 1½ out of 5 in the irrigation facility from the well, motor pump set and electricity service connection. According to the plaintiff, he has been enjoying this right ever since the date of purchase of the suit property and that the defendants are attempting to interfere with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the same.
While so, he cannot convey 1/11 share in the electric motor pump set and electricity service connection.
in A.S. No.49/2009, the learned Subordinate Judge, Ranipet, reversed the findings of the trial court and decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff vide his decree and judgment dated 21.02.2011 on the following grounds.
filed on the following substantial questions of law:
motor pump set and electricity service connection especially when the defendants have denied the existence of such a right.
in those days there was a practice of transferring irrigation facility proportionate to the land purchased and that the vendor would not have foreseen the problems that would crop up after getting electricity service connection and after installation of electric motor pump set. This observation of the first appellate court cannot be accepted especially when there is no mention about the transferring of share in the electric motor pump set and electricity service connection in the sale deeds Ex.A2, Ex.A3 and Ex.A5. It is admitted that the electricity service connection was obtained in the year 1968 and Ex.A2, Ex.A3 and Ex.A5 are subsequent to that. As already observed, there is also no mention about Ex.A11 agreement in the sale deed Ex.A6 executed in favour of the plaintiff.
Petition is closed.
ii.The decree and judgment dated 21.02.2011 passed in A.S. No.49 of 2009, on the file of the Subordinate Court, Ranipet, is set aside.
iii.The decree and judgment dated 29.07.2009 passed in O.S. No.101 of 2005, on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Arcot, is upheld.
iv.The suit in O.S. No.101 of 2005, on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Arcot, is dismissed with costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-VII)
// True Copy //
Sub Assistant Registrar
bga
To
Ranipet.
Judicial Magistrate,
Arcot.
High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.V.Ragavachari, Advocate Sr.No.26481
S.A.No.959 of 2011
GMR(CO) RVM(18/05/2022)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a specific right in the electric motor pump set and electricity service connection merely because they purchased a share in the land without a deed conveying such
Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the claimed rights when their vendors had no right to convey such rights.
Whether a vendor can convey a better title than what they possess regarding irrigation facilities and electricity connections.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
C. Krishnan
C. Kandiban
C. Babu
M. Krishnan
E R. Hemalatha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
