Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 3]

Supreme Court of India

P.K. Narayanan Raja vs Ambika And Anr. on 10 August, 2018

Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2018 SC 123, AIRONLINE 2018 SC 133

Author: Abhay Manohar Sapre

Bench: S. Abdul Nazeer, Abhay Manohar Sapre

                                                           NON­REPORTABLE

                              IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                               CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                CIVIL APPEAL No.561 OF 2008


                         P.K. Narayanan Raja                     ….Appellant(s)

                              VERSUS

                         Ambika And Anr.                         …Respondent(s)


                                        J U D G M E N T

                         Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.

1) This   appeal   is   directed   against   the   final judgment and order dated 23.12.2004 passed by the Madras   High   Court   (Madurai   Bench)   in   Second Appeal   No.19   of   1995   whereby   the   High   Court allowed the second appeal and set aside the order of the lower Appellate Court.

2) It is not necessary to set out the entire facts of Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ANITA MALHOTRA the case in detail except to the extent necessary for Date: 2018.08.10 17:14:08 IST Reason: the disposal of the appeal.

1

3) The   appellant   is   the   plaintiff   and   the respondents   are   the   defendants.   The   appellant   and the respondents are members of one family and are thus related to one another.

4) The suit out of which this appeal arises was for a declaration and permanent injunction in relation to certain   immovable   properties   as   specified   in   the plaint, which are alleged to belong to members of the family. The respondents contested the suit.

5) By   judgment/decree   dated   29.04.1991   in   O.S. No.236   of   1989,   the   Trial   Court   dismissed   the appellant's suit. The appellant felt aggrieved and filed first   appeal   before   the   District   Judge.   By judgment/decree   dated   07.03.1994,   the   first Appellate   Court   allowed   the   plaintiff's   appeal   and decreed   the   suit.   The  defendants  felt  aggrieved and filed   second   appeal   before   the   High   Court.   By impugned order, the High Court allowed the appeal and   dismissed   the   suit   giving   rise   to   filing   of   the 2 appeal by  way  of  special leave before this Court by the plaintiff.

6) At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the parties stated and brought to our notice that one civil suit   being   OS   No.46/1986   is   pending   between   the appellant   and   the   respondents   in   the   Court   of Subordinate   Judge   of   Srivilliputur   (TN).     This   suit i.e.,   O.S.No.46/1986   is   for   partition   of   several properties   belonging   to   the   members   of   the   family, who are also parties to the present appeal.

7) If that be the position then, in our opinion, the property,   which   is   subject   matter   of   this   appeal, should   also   necessarily   be   subjected   to   its adjudication   in   OS   No.46/1986   along   with   other properties.  In any event, in our view, it would be just and proper that all properties belonging to or claim to belonging to the family or/and its members though denied   by   the  parties against  each other  should  be 3 made subject matter of one civil suit rather than two civil suits.

8) It is for this reason, we do not consider it proper to express any opinion on the rights of the parties so far as the suit property in question is concerned and grant  liberty to  the parties of this appeal to amend their pleadings in OS No.46/1986 in relation to the suit property in question in addition to the properties which are already part of OS No. 46/1986 so that the concerned Trial Court will be able to decide the rights of   the   parties   in   relation   to   the   entire   properties including the one in question in this appeal.

9) We,   therefore,   set   aside   all   the   three judgments/decrees,   i.e.,   judgments/decrees   passed by   Trial   Court,   First   Appellate   Court   and   Second Appellate Court out of which this appeal arises and grant liberty to the parties to amend their respective pleadings in civil suit O.S. No.46/1986 by including 4 the suit property of the present appeal in the pending civil suit (O.S.No.46/1986). 

10) The Trial Court will then proceed to decide the suit   (O.S.No.46/1986)   expeditiously   by   framing additional   issues,   if   required,   in   relation   to   the properties   in   question   on   the   basis   of   amended pleadings   and   will   also   allow   the   parties   to   file documents   and   lead   evidence   in   support   of   their pleadings including amended pleadings. 

11) The   Trial   Court   will   decide   the   suit   strictly   in accordance   with   law   uninfluenced   by   any   of   the observations made by the Courts below in this case.

12) Let   the   trial   of   civil   suit   (OS   No.46/1986)   be completed within one year.

5

13) With   these   observations   and   directions,   the appeal stands disposed of. 

                  

………...................................J.   [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE]                                      …...……..................................J.          [S. ABDUL NAZEER] New Delhi;

August 10, 2018  6