The Court in an appeal against dismissal of a suit for permanent injunction regarding disputed land, held that second appeals prolonging litigation are unsustainable. The judgment dismissed the second appeal at the threshold.
The second appeal was dismissed at the threshold.
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.
SA No. 88 of 2017 Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.
Mr. M.S. Tyagi, Advocate for the appellant.
Having heard the learned counsel of the appellant/plaintiff, the case as pleaded was that way back on 01.7.1956 a lease was granted for five years pertaining to the land under litigation to Mr. Abdul Majeed, who was the husband of Smt. Asgari (the second appellant herein).
It has further been pleaded that such lease deed kept on increasing for another five years term repeatedly while the case of the respondent is that it was not renewed by the Department after 1988 but, the appellant pleaded that he kept on depositing the lease rent upto 1992-93.
With this background, the original suit no. 14/1998 was presented by Mr. Abdul Majeed against the respondents seeking permanent injunction against them and not to interfere in his possession over the property in question. Such suit could be adjudicated by the learned court of the Civil Judge on merits on 24.12.2013. It resulted into dismissal. The civil appeal no. 22/2015 challenging the judgment of the learned Civil Judge was also dismissed on merits on 12.4.2017. It has been admitted by the appellant that the original lease deed is not available with him and the case of Public Premises Act to remove this illegal occupation of the land has been launched by the department in 2011, which is pending adjudication.
It can be discerned that how such litigation is being prolonged and by whom. I think there is no force in this second appeal. It is hereby dismissed at the threshold.
(Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.)
18.7.2017
Pooja
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the second appeal itself is maintainable given the prolonged litigation and absence of primary lease deed.
Appellant
Respondent
Servesh Kumar Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
