| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1994 SLG 511 1994 SLD 511 1994 SCMR 212 |
Supreme Court of India
Civil Appeal No. 3284 of 1992 (arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.3350 of 1992, decision dated: 19-08-1992
LALIT MOHAN SHARMA AND S. RANGANATHAN, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Appeal No. 3284 of 1992 (arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.3350 of 1992, decision dated: 19-08-1992
LALIT MOHAN SHARMA AND S. RANGANATHAN, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MOHAN PANDEY and others
Smt. USHA RANI RAJGARIA and others
Law:
Section:
Writ--Alternative remedy---Dispute between two private persons with regard to immovable property ---Ejectment suit directly covering property in question pending in Civil Court---Writ petition for restraining respondents from disturbing lawful possession of petitioner alleging some complaints made by respondents and action taken by police thereon was not maintainable, for remedy for such matters was civil suit or under the Criminal Procedure Code against alleged criminal complaints---Constitution of India Art. 226. JUDGMENT LALIT MOHAN SHARMA", J.---Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Special leave is granted. 2. The respondents in this appeal have successfully invoked the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of Constitution for enforcement of a private right to immovable property against the appellants who are two brothers and who are resisting the claim. The question is as to whether the writ jurisdiction in the High Court is available for the enforcement of such a right claimed by and against private individual. 3. The dispute relates to a house-property in Delhi. A suit for eviction of the appellants from the building is pending in the trial Court. According to the case of the respondent No.1, who is the owner of the property, she had let out the same to one Shri B.K. Pandey who later illegally handed over the possession thereof to the appellant No.1. According to the further case of the respondent, the portion of the said house property which is the subject-matter of the present case is beyond the purview of the pending suit. The occasion for initiating the present proceeding with respect to this portion arose, it is said, on account of the highhandedness of the appellants who illegally trespassed beyond the area which is the subject-matter of the pending suit, and indulged in several illegal activities. In other words the appellants are trespassers and are guilty of mischievous conduct. However, instead of filing a suit in the Civil Court or making an appropriate prayer for, amendment of her plaint in the pending suit, she through respondent No.2 holding power of attorney, approached the High Court directly by a writ petition under…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492