JHARKHAND STATE HOUSING BOARD Vs. DIDAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dt. 12.10.2001 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi inSecond Appeal No.88/2000 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by theBoard by confirming the concurrent findings of the courts below.

(2.) Brief facts in nutshell for proper adjudication of the dispute involved in the presentappeal are, the plaintiff has filed a suit for permanent injunction alleging that suitschedule property originally belongs to Raja A.P. Singh Deo of estate of Seraikella. Laterthe property was purchased by Kumar Subodh Singh Deo vide registered Sale DeedNo.3201 dated 4.12.1989. He, in turn, sold the property to the plaintiff vide registered Sale Deed dated 8.8.1990 for a consideration of Rs.12,000/- and since then he is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property by constructing a residential buildingin the land. While that being so, the defendant-Board has issued notice dated 4.1.1992asking the plaintiff to quit and give vacant possession of the suit land and threatened theplaintiff to dispossess from the suit land without any right and title over the same. Hencethe plaintiff has come up with the present suit to protect his possession.

(3.) The defendant has filed the written statement contending that the plaintiff vendor hasno legal right and title over the suit schedule property and the sale deed executed by hisvendor will not confer any right or title to the plaintiff. Further the suit schedule propertyalong with other properties was acquired by the defendants by way of land acquisitionproceedings in the year 1965 and the possession was handed over to them. As such,except the defendant, no one else has right or title over the property. The defendant hastaken several other grounds with regard to maintainability of the suit on the ground ofmisjoinder of proper and necessary parties to the suit, on the ground of limitation, undersection 92 of the B.S.H.B. Act and Rules, as no prior notice was issued before institutingthe suit. Also under Section 62 of the CNT Act, it is the case of the defendant that thepresent Suit is not maintainable without seeking the relief of declaration of title. The suitschedule property was recorded in the revenue records in the name of the defendant.Without seeking right, title, possession and correction of entries in record of right,plaintiff cannot maintain the suit for injunction and hence sought for dismissal of the suit.