PT. SHAMBOO NATH TIKOO AND OTHERS versus SARDAR GIAN SINGH AND OTHERS

Citation: [1995] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 692 · Decided: 30-06-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
PT. SHAMBOO NATH TIKOO AND OTHERS 
v. 
SARDAR GIAN SINGH AND OTHERS 
JUNE 30, 1995 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.] 
Property Law : Transfer of Property Act, 1882/Easements Act 
1882-Disputed property-Lands, Dharamshallas, temples and springs 
situated in Anantnag, State of Jammu & Kashmir,-Suit filed by the plaintiffs 
C i.e. Hindus-(a) for ejectment of the defendants i.e. Sikhs from two rooms 
(Conveited into three rooms) of the suit property and (b) for p~17nanent in-
junction to restrain the defendants from inteifeling with their possession of 
disputed property and their peifonnance of religious ceremonies and pujas 
on the said property--Wliether the possession of the two rooms by the defen-
D dant, was pennissive and hence revocable by the plaintiffs as successors of 
Dha11na1th.-Whether the defendants had acquired a title to the two rooms, 
by way of adverse possession or had acquired owneiship, because of their 
possession being given by Maharaja Pratap Singh by way of a grant-Whether 
or not the defendants had an easementary 1ight over the open spaces in the 
disputed land to its user for religious congregations or Dewa1is. 
E 
Constitution of India-A1t. 142-Dispute regarding easement right for 
religious congregations-Jurisdiction under A1t. 142( 1) exercised in order to 
do complete justice. 
The appellants who are Hindus filed before the High Court of 
F 
Jammu and Kashmir a suit for grant of permanent injunction to restrain 
the defendants (a) from interfering with their possession of certain land, 
Dharamshalla, temples and springs at Tirath Martand, Anantnag, State 
of Jammu and Kashmir; (b) From obstructing their performance of 
religious ceremonies and (c) from putting up construction on the disputed 
G lands; (d) so also for ejectment of the defendants from the two rooms of 
the Southern Dharamshalla. 
The suit was partially dl!Cr'll'd to the extent of restraining the defen· 
dants by way of a permanent inju11ction from interfering in any way Yjith 
the performance of religious ceremonies by the Hindus, and from erecpng 
H any Gurudwara at the Martand Premises but was refused as regards eject· 
692 
S.N. TIKOO v. S.G. SINGH 
693 
·men! of the defendants from the said two room, which was being used by A 
them to keep their sacred' Granth Sahib'. 
Aggrieved, the plaintiffs as well as the defendants filed first appeals, 
before the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir to the extent of.their.respec-
tive grievances. 
By it judgment and order the High Court partly allowed the plaintill's 
appeal to the extent of confining the holding of Dewans in the vacant space 
by the defendants to three specified occasions namely Baisakhi, Dasmi and 
Chatti Padshahi but on the other hand dismissed the appeal of the defen-
dants as a whole. 
The decree in the suit, as affirmed in appeal before the High Court, 
B 
c 
was thus challenged by the plaintiffs, before this Court limited to the 
following issues : (a) Refusal by the Courts below, to grant the decree 
against the defendants, for their ejectment from the two room of the 
Dharamshalla and (b) Non grant of permanent injunction against the D 
defendants, in respect of holding of Dewans in the vacant space, by recog-
nising their easementary rights thereto. 
Against the plea of ejectment in respect of the said two rooms it was 
contended ·by tbe defendants that (a) under a grant made to the Sikh 
community by the erstwhile ruler of State of Jammu, Maharaja Pratap E 
Singh, they bad become the owners thereof; (b) or in the alternative, they 
had acquired a title to the said rooms by way of adverse possession; (c) and 
that they had also acquired easementary rights of conducting Dewans, on 
three specific religious occasion is every year, in the open space of Marland 
Shrine and hence were not liable to be restrained by a permanent injunction 
from holding the said Dewans. 
All efforts to bring the present dispute to an amicable settlement 
having failed, this Court on merits. 
F 
HELD : 1. The plea of grant, by Maharaja Pratap Singh having not G 
been earlier put forward by the defendants in their written statement, the 
·s.ame is unsustainable in law. (712-C] 
2. The possession of the two rooms, given to the Sikh community at 
the behest of Maharaja Pratap Singh for keeping the 'Granth Sahib' was 
purely in the nature of permissive possession. Permissive possession can-
H 
694 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995] SUPP. l S.C.R. 
A 
not be converted into an adver

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.