NDLI: The Tehsildar, Urban Improvement Trust and Anr. Vs. Ganga Bai Menariya (dead) Through Lrs. and Others

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Lease of land by Gram Panchayat
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959 (35 of 1959) Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Disposed Off
Headnote	Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959 – In C.A. No.722 of 2012, the trial Court found that the respondents-plaintiffs were found to be in illegal possession of the land and were not entitled to the injunction prayed for – It was specifically noticed that the suit had not been filed for declaration as it was merely for injunction and the encroachers on the land were not found entitled to the relief of injunction – First Appellate Court reversed the findings of the trial Court and the suit was decreed – The High Court upheld the judgment and decree of the First Appellate Court – Propriety: Held: The fact remains that no revenue record was produced by the respondents-plaintiffs to show that the land in question was ever mutated in their favour – In the evidence led, they were found to be in possession as even the case set up by the appellants is that they issued notice to the respondents-plaintiffs u/s. 92A of the 1959 Act – The respondents-plaintiffs while filing the civil suit did not implead the Gram Panchayat as party – In such circumstances, the respondents-plaintiffs were required to prove the document as the competence of the Gram Panchayat to lease out the land itself was in question – In the revenue record produced on record by the appellants, it is shown that the land in question was shown in ownership of Government – In the light of the aforesaid stand and the evidence led on record by the appellants-defendants, it was incumbent on the respondents to have proved their title on the land, which they failed to establish – Further a suit simpliciter for injunction may not be maintainable as the title of the property of the plaintiff/respondent was disputed by the appellants/defendants – In such a situation it was required for the respondent/plaintiff to prove the title of the property while praying for injunction – In opinion of this Court, the judgment of the High Court suffers from patent illegality – Consequently, the judgment and decree of the First Appellate Court as well as the High Court are set aside and that of the Trial Court is restored. [Paras 20,21,21.1,21.2] Rajasthan Panchayat (General) Rules, 1961 – r. 266 – In C.A. Nos.8977/2012, 468/2013, 524/2013, 467/2013 and Civil Appeal @ S.L.P.(C) No.25200/2013, civil suits were filed claiming that the land in question was leased out to the plaintiffs by the Gram Panchayat – In support of the plea, the plaintiff/ respondent placed on record the document dated 27.08.1985, the lease deed – However, the same was not proved – The trial Court came to the conclusion that no case was made out by the plaintiff/respondent – Hence, the suit for permanent injunction was dismissed – First Appellate Court passed the decree of permanent injunction – Same was upheld by the High Court – Propriety: Held: As recorded by the Trial Court, the respondents/plaintiffs had not been able to prove the document on the basis of which they were claiming a right of possession of the property in question – Even if the aforesaid document is considered, the sale was clearly violative of Rule 266 of the 1961 Rules, under which aforesaid alleged lease deed/sale deed has been issued in favour of the respondents/plaintiffs – In terms of Rule 266 of the 1961 Rules, only in certain specified situation, the land could be transferred by way of sale on private negotiation, namely, where any person has a plausible claim of title to the land and auction may not fetch reasonable price or it may not be the convenient mode for disposal of land or where such a course is regarded by the Panchayat necessary for advancement of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes or other Backward Classes – Another situation envisaged is where the person is in possession of land for more than 20 years but less than 42 years – Nothing was produced on record to show that the due process required for leasing out/sale of the land in favour of the respondents/plaintiffs by private negotiation was followed – Gram Panchayat from whom the land was taken was not impleaded as party to admit or deny the allegations made by the respondents/plaintiffs in the plaint – The impugned judgments of the High Court as well as the First Appellate Court are set aside and that of the trial Court is restored – Resultantly, the suits are dismissed. [Paras 29, 30]
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Neutral Citation	2024 INSC 121
Petitioner	The Tehsildar, Urban Improvement Trust And Anr.
Respondent	Ganga Bai Menariya (dead) Through Lrs. And Others
SCR	[2024] 2 S.C.R. 650
Judgement Date	2024-02-20
Case Number	722

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

The Tehsildar, Urban Improvement Trust and Anr. Vs. Ganga Bai Menariya (dead) Through Lrs. and Others

Please Log-in to view this content

Urban Improvement Trust, Bikaner Vs. Gordhan Dass (d) Through Lrs. & Others

Pankajakshi (dead) Through Lrs. & Others Vs. Chandrika & Others

Baljit Singh Vs. Improvement Trust Ludhiana & Anr.

Laxmi Bai Vs. Dayanu Narayah Mohite(dead) Through Lrs

Jagan Singh (dead) Through Lrs. Vs. Dhanwanti & Anr.

Urban Improvement Trust, Udaipur Vs. Bheru Lal and Ors.

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Vs. Okha Gram Panchayat and Others

Narayan Sitaramji Badwaik (dead) Through Lrs Vs. Bisaram and Others

Union of India & Anr. Vs. Raghubir Singh (dead) By Lrs. Etc.

The Tehsildar, Urban Improvement Trust and Anr. Vs. Ganga Bai Menariya (dead) Through Lrs. and Others

The Tehsildar, Urban Improvement Trust and Anr. Vs. Ganga Bai Menariya (dead) Through Lrs. and Others

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Urban Improvement Trust, Bikaner Vs. Gordhan Dass (d) Through Lrs. & Others

Pankajakshi (dead) Through Lrs. & Others Vs. Chandrika & Others

Baljit Singh Vs. Improvement Trust Ludhiana & Anr.

Laxmi Bai Vs. Dayanu Narayah Mohite(dead) Through Lrs

Jagan Singh (dead) Through Lrs. Vs. Dhanwanti & Anr.

Urban Improvement Trust, Udaipur Vs. Bheru Lal and Ors.

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Vs. Okha Gram Panchayat and Others

Narayan Sitaramji Badwaik (dead) Through Lrs Vs. Bisaram and Others

Union of India & Anr. Vs. Raghubir Singh (dead) By Lrs. Etc.

The Tehsildar, Urban Improvement Trust and Anr. Vs. Ganga Bai Menariya (dead) Through Lrs. and Others