LexPURSHOTTAM DAS TANDON DEAD BY LRS. versus MILITARY ESTATE OFFICER & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2014] 7 S.C.R. 1085 PURSHOTTAM DAS 1ANDON DEAD BY LRS. A v. MILITARY ESTATE OFFICER & ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 2147 of 2006) AUGUST 13, 2014 [RANJAN GOGOi AND M.Y. EQBAL, JJ.] Government grants - Property purchased by predecessors of the appellant in auction - Resumption notice B by Union of India leading to writ petition - Case of UO/ that C the land on which the property stood was the subject of old grant under which a right of resumption as also title to the land vested in the Union; and only the building was conveyed to the predecessors of the appellant - High Court holding that the parties to move to civil court for adjudication of title - Suit D seeking eviction of tenant and sub-tenant by appellant - Notice by UO/ demanding rent from occupants - Inter-pleader suit by one of the tenant - Decree thero1.: that appellant entitled to receive rent in respect of the p:uperty, upheld by Supreme Court - Writ petition by appellant seeking mutation E of property-bung/ow as owners - Dismissal of, holding that in terms of the order in earlier writ petition, dispute required adjudication in a civil suit - Application by the appellant seeking sanction of plan to raise construction - Rejection of, in view of the resumption order - Aggrieved, appellant filing F another writ petition asserting his ownership of the property - Disposed of, holding that in the inter-pleader suit it was already decided that the property belonged to the appellant and the question of title to the property had become res judicata - Order challenged before Supreme Court - Matter G remanded back to the High Cou,1 on the issue of res judicata - High Court holding that the decree in the inter-pleader suit that appellant to be entitled to receive the rent, would not operate as a res judicata so as to confer any finality to the 1085 H 1086 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 7 S.C.R. A issue of title - Parties left with the option of adjudication of title in a suit for declaration - On appeal, held: Subject matter of the two proceedings-inter-pleader suit and the appeals arising therefrom and the writ petitions filed by appellant not directly and substantially the same so as to attract the B principle of res judicata enshrined in s. 11 CPC - Having regard to the nature of the dispute and the highly contentious issue raised, and the earlier order in the writ petition, no infirmity in the impugned order, so as to warrant interference - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - s. 11 - Res judicata - c Cantonment Act, 1924 - ss. 181, 274. The grandfather of the appellant purchased the property in a court auction in the year 1848. The Union of India issued a resumption notice in respect of the said property in the year 1968. The appellant filed a writ D petition. The Union of India contended that the land on which the property stood was the subject of old grant under which a right of resumption as also title to the land vested in the Union; and that it was only the building which was conveyed to the predecessors of the appellant E and the same could always be resumed subject to payment of compensation to be assessed on the cost of the building. The High Court relegated the parties to the remedy of a civil suit being highly disputed question of fact relating to title. The appellant filed a suit seeking F eviction of the tenants and sub-tenants in the property. The Union of India served notice upon the said two occupants demanding rent. One of the tenant filed an inter-pleader suit. The trial court held that the appellant was entitled to receive rent. The said order was upheld G in the second appeal as also special leave petition. The appellant filed W.P. No.13353 of 1992 to mutate the name of the petitioners as owners of Bungalow. The writ petition was dismissed on 07.01.2000 holding that the dispute required resolution in a regular civil suit in terms H of the earlier order in the writ petition. The appellant also PURSHOTTAM DAS TANDON DEAD BY LRS. v. 1087 MILITARY ESTATE OFFICER 'filed an application before the competent authority u/s . .,·A 181 of the Cantonment Act, 1924 seeking sanction of plan to raise construction and the same was rejected. The !appellant then filed W.P. No.28558/02 asserting his ;ownership of the property-bunglow. The High Court 'disposed of the petition requiring the appellant to file B _ appeal u/s. 274 of the Cantonment Act against the order of rejection. The High Co
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.