THE TEHSILDAR, URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST AND ANR. versus GANGA BAI MENARIYA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND OTHERS

Citation: [2024] 2 S.C.R. 650 · Decided: 20-02-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: VIKRAM NATH · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

* Author
[2024] 2 S.C.R. 650 : 2024 INSC 121
The Tehsildar, Urban Improvement Trust and Anr. 
v. 
Ganga Bai Menariya (Dead) Through Lrs. and Others
(Civil Appeal No. 722 of 2012)
20 February 2024
[Vikram Nath and Rajesh Bindal,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Civil Appeal No. 722 of 2012
The respondents-plaintiffs claimed that they had been granted patta 
(lease) of the land by Gram Panchayat in the year 1959 and on 
the basis thereof, they were continuing in possession. However, 
the land was still being shown in the ownership of the Government. 
A civil suit was filed by the respondents for permanent injunction 
and for ownership and possession of the suit land. The suit was 
filed as a notice was issued by the appellants u/s. 92A of the 
Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959. Whether a suit simpliciter 
for injunction was maintainable as the title of the property of the 
plaintiff/respondent was disputed by the appellants/defendants.
C.A. Nos.8977/2012, 468/2013, 524/2013, 467/2013 and Civil 
Appeal @ S.L.P.(C)No.25200/2013
In the aforesaid bunch of appeals and the Special Leave Petition, the 
High Court had disposed of all the appeals, relying upon its earlier 
judgment dated 14.07.2009 in S.B. Civil Second Appeal No.6/2008 
titled as The Tehsildar, Urban Improvement Trust and another v. 
Late Smt. Ganga Bai Menariya through legal representatives. The 
aforesaid appeal decided by the High Court is subject matter of 
consideration before this Court in C.A. No.722 of 2012.
Headnotes
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 
[2024] 2 S.C.R. 
651
The Tehsildar, Urban Improvement Trust And Anr. v.  
Ganga Bai Menariya (Dead) Through Lrs. And Others
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 Cou

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