Himachal Pradesh High Court
State Of Himachal Pradesh vs Mandir Devi Lagasan Waka Naog on 27 August, 2021
Author: Sureshwar Thakur
Bench: Sureshwar Thakur
Reportable
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA
ON THE 27th DAY OF AUGUST, 2021
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR
.
REGULAR SECOND APPEAL No. 152 OF 2006.
Between:-
1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY,
HIMACHAL PRADESH GOVERNMENT.
2. THE SECRETARY (REVENUE) TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF H.P., SHIMLA.
3. THE COLLECTOR DISTRICT SOLAN,
H.P.
.....APPELLANTS.
(BY MR. HEMANT VAID, ADDL. ADVOCATE
GENERAL)
AND
1. MANDIR DEVI LAGASAN WAKA NAOG,
PARGANA PASHGOAN, TEHSIL KANDAGHAT,
DISTRICT SOLAN, H.P. THROUGH KESHWA
RAM SON OF SHRI PALAK RAM, RESIDENTS
OF VILLAGE NAOG, PARGANA PASHGAON,
TEHSIL KANDAGHAT, DISTRICT SOLAN,
HIMACHAL PRADESH.
2. MANDIR DEVI LAGASAN WAKA
VILLAGE KARGANOO THROUGH SHRI
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS
...2...
DEVI RAM SON OF SHRI RAM SINGH
.
MOHATMIM,
VILLAGE NAOG, PARGANA PASHGAON,
TEHSIL KANDAGHAT, DISTRICT SOLAN,
HIMACHAL PRADESH.
3. MANDIR DEVI LAGASAN WAKA VILLAGE
DUDHAM THROUGH SHRI HARI NAND,
SON OF SHRI PALAK RAM MOHATMIM
VILLAGE NAOG, PASHAGOAN, TEHSIL
KANDAGHAT, DISTRICT SOLAN, H.P.
4. MANDIR DEVI LAGASAN VILLAGE REHAR,
THROUGH SHRI JAI DUTT SHARMA,
MOHATMIM, VILLAGE NAOG, PARGANA
PASHAGOAN, TEHSIL KANDAGHAT, DISTRICT
SOLAN, H.P.
.....RESPONDENTS.
(BY MR. BHUPENDER GUPTA, SENIOR
ADVOCATE WITH MR. JANESH GUPTA,
ADVOCATE).
RESERVED ON : 18th AUGUST, 2021.
DELIVERED ON: 27th AUGUST, 2021.
This Regular Second Appeal coming on for hearing
this day, the Court passed the following:-
JUDGEMENT
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS
...3...
The plaintiffs instituted a Civil Suit bearing No. .
52/S/1 of 2000/93 before the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Kandaghat. In the afore civil suit, the plaintiff claimed the making of a declaratory decree, reliefs whereof become extracted hereinafter:-
"It is, therefore, prayed that a decree for declaration to the effect that the plaintiffs are four temples at four different places under four different Mohatmims and are four different entities having separate status, personalities and are four different juristic persons and the said plaintiffs have no concern with the personal property and ownership of the Mohatmims and are liable to declared entitled to four different units as such independently and revenue entries are liable to be corrected accordingly, and further mutations effect otherwise than the above said, the same are not binding upon the plaintiffs, the order of the authorities of Himachal Pradesh under H.P. Ceiling Act are illegal, inoperative, null and void and are beyond the purview of the provisions of the said Act and the plaintiffs are owners in possession of the said land comprised in Khata Nos. 1 to 3, Khatauni Nos. 2 to 7 all kits 78 measuring 1605-13 bighas at village Naog, Pargana Pashgoan, Tehsil Kandaghat, District Solan, H.P. per jamabandi for the year 1989-90 to the extent of four units with consequential relief of possession and injunction restraining the defendants from making any interference in the suit land, allotting ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...4...
the same to any other person or persons may be .
passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants."
The learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) concerned, through its verdict made upon the afore civil suit on 15.12.2003, proceeded to decline the afore espoused decree(s) to the plaintiffs.
2. The aggrieved plaintiffs carried thereagainst, a Civil Appeal bearing No. 42FT/13 of 2005 before the learned First Appellate Court, and, the learned First Appellate Court, through its verdict made thereon, on 5.12.2005 rather allowed the plaintiffs' appeal, in the hereinafter extracted manner:-
"39. It is held that the plaintiffs are four separate legal entities. As on the appointed day, that is, on 24.1.1971 they were joint owners of land measuring 1593-05 bigha as detailed in the order of Collector dated 30.07.1976. The Collector is directed to pass fresh order under H.P. Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, treating each of the plaintiffs as a separate unit and to restor4e the possession of the remaining land, that is, the land that will remain after declaring surplus. Parties are left to bear their own costs."
3. The State of Himachal Pradesh becomes aggrieved from the afore made verdict by the learned First Appellate Court upon Civil Appeal bearing No. 42FT/13 of 2005, and, has strived ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...5...
to annul the afore verdict through its instituting the extant .
Regular Second Appeal before this Court.
4. When the appeal came up for hearing before this Court on 8.11.2006, this Court admitted the appeal on the hereinafter extracted substantial question of law:-
"Whether the finding of the first Appellate Court that the Civil Court has the jurisdiction is contrary to law?"
5. The learned Additional Additional Advocate has contended with much vigour before this Court, that with Section 18 of the Himachal Pradesh Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), provisions whereof stand extracted hereinafter:-
"18. Bar of jurisdiction.- (1) No civil court shall have jurisdiction to-
(a) entertain or proceed with a suit for specific performance of a contract for transfer of land which affects the right of the State Government to the surplus area under this Act; or
(b) settle, decide or deal with any matter which is under this Act required to be settled, decide or dealt with by the Financial Commissioner, the Commissioner, the Collector.::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS
...6...
(2) No order of the Financial Commissioner, the .
Commissioner, the Collector made under or in pursuance of this Act, shall be called in question in any court."
completely barring the jurisdiction of the civil court, to entertain or proceed with a suit for specific performance of a contract, for transfer of land, which affects the right of the State Government to surplus area under this Act, and, also completely barring the civil courts, to decide any lis which otherwise, is covered within the ambit of the Act. Furthermore, with sub-section (2) thereof also casting an embargo against any challenge being made before the civil court concerned, vis-a-vis, the orders of the Financial Commissioner, the Commissioner, and the Collector, hence, he contends that the proceedings, as, drawn before the Civil Court concerned, are without any jurisdiction. Therefore, he argues that the learned First Appellate Court in declaring that the Civil Court had jurisdiction to try and decide the lis, inasmuch, as its involving a disputed question of title of the plaintiffs to the suit land, was a gross legal fallacy, and, also a statutory fallacy.
He further strengthened the afore submission, on anvil, of a conclusive and binding order(s) becoming respectively ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...7...
pronounced, upon, the very same issue(s) encapsulated in the .
extant civil suit, hence, by the Collector Kandaghat, and, by the Financial Commissioner concerned.
6. The learned Additional Advocate General, supports his afore submission, through his making dependence, upon, a verdict of the Hon'ble Apex Court, rendered in a case tilted as Dhulabhai etc., v. State of Madhya Pradesh and another, reported in AIR 1969 SC 78, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court, has, carved the hereinafter extracted principles hence governing the exclusion(s) of jurisdiction(s) of Civil Court(s):-
"(1) Where the statute gives a finality to the orders of the special tribunals the civil court's jurisdiction must be held to be excluded if there is adequate remedy to do what the civil courts would normally do in a suit. Such provision, however, does not exclude those cases where the provisions of the particular Act have not been complied with or the statutory tribunal has not acted in conformity with the fundamental principles of judicial procedure. (2) Where there is an express bar of the jurisdiction of the an examination of the scheme of the particular Act to find the adequacy or the sufficiency of the remedies provided may be relevant but is not decisive to sustain the jurisdiction of the civil court.
Where there is no express exclusion the examination ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...8...
of the remedies and the scheme of the particular Act .
to find out the intendment becomes necessary and the result of the inquiry may be decisive. In the latter case, it is necessary to see if the statute creates a special right or a liability and provides for the determination of the right or liability and further lays down that all questions about the said right and liability shall be determined by the tribunals so constituted, and whether remedies normally associated with actions in civil courts are prescribed by the said statute or not.
(3) Challenge to the provisions of the particular Act as ultra vires cannot be brought before Tribunals constituted under that Act. Eve,, the High Court cannot go into that question on a revision or reference from the decision of the Tribunals.
(4) When a provision is already declared unconstitutional or the constitutionality of any provision is to be challenged, a suit is open. A writ of certiorari may include a direction for refund if the claim is clearly within the time prescribed by the Limitation Act but it not a compulsory remedy to replace a suit.
(5) Where the particular Act contains no machinery for refund of, tax collected in excess of constitutional limits or illegally collected a suit lies. (6) Questions of the correctness of the assessment apart from its constitutionality are for the decision of the authorities and a civil suit,does not lie if the orders of the authorities are declared to be final or there is an express prohibition in the particular Act.
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS...9...
In either case, the scheme of the particular Act must .
be examined because it is a relevant enquiry.
(7) An exclusion of jurisdiction of the Civil Court is not readily to be inferred unless the conditions above down apply."
He submits that when the Hon'ble Apex Court, has made a clear candid expression of law, that when an express bar explicitly excludes the jurisdiction of the civil courts, to try the controversy concerned, in respect whereof, the apposite statutory enactment exists, moreso, also when the special mechanism contained in the special legislative enactment, has been fully recoursed, thereupon, the jurisdiction of the civil court is barred, and, there is no scope for the civil courts concerned, to discover the adequacy and sufficiency of remedies, as become provided in the relevant special stautory mechanism.
7. The afore made submission before this Court by the learned Additional Advocate General, does prima facie, sustain his submission, that the verdict impugned before this Court is lacking in legal worth.
8. However, the learned Additional Advocate General has yet remained unmindful to the salient principle hence also expostulated in the verdict supra, inasmuch, as, he has remained ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...10...
oblivious, to the factum that dehors, a complete embargo being .
cast under the special statute against the entertainment or settling of lis, rather covered within the domain of a special statute, and/or when the special statute assigns finality and conclusivity, to the decisions made by the statutory authorities concerned, that yet in verdict supra, upon, evidence surging forth, and, its displaying that the statutory authorities concerned, rather not complying with the statutory provisions borne in the special statute, and/or upon theirs evidently acting against the principles of natural justice, rather thereupon, yet the Civil Court concerned, becoming vested with jurisdiction to entertain and also to settle the lis carried in the plaint instituted before the Civil Court concerned.
9. Therefore, it has to be adjudged from the pleadings as well as from the evidence existing on record, both, before the statutory authorities concerned, and, from the ones as become emb odied in the records of the extant suit, that (a) whether the statutory authorities concerned, had departed from the principles of natural justice; (b) whether they had violated the statutory provisions carried in the Act. In case, this Court, upon, ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...11...
making the afore discernments, comes to the conclusion, that .
the afore exception has been satiated by the plaintiffs. As a sequitur, this court would refrain to interfere with the impugned verdict pronounced by the learned first Appellate Court.
10. A perusal of the plaint discloses that four temples are constituted therein as co-plaintiffs. All the four temples, are named Mandir Devi Lagasan. Since, the deity located inside the plaintiff temples is a minor, hence, each of the four temple deities, hence suing as plaintiffs, and, claiming the declaratory decree rather through their respective Mohatmims/Managers. In paragraph No.1 of the plaint, a candid averment is carried, that about 400 years ago, four temples were existing at four different villages, respectively named as Naog, Karganoo, Dudam and Rehar, and, these temples were under the Mohatmimship of the family of Bhardwaj, and, thereafter their descendants inherited the mohatmimship to the temples (supra). The Mohatmims were performing puja etc. in the temples concerned. The temples were granted land as Muafi, and, the suit land is averred to be comprised in Khata No.1, Khatauni No.1 to 4, Khata No.2, Khatauni No.5 and Khata No.3, Khatauni No.6 and 7 kitas 78, ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...12...
measuring 1605.13 bighas, situated at Village Naog, Pargana .
Pashgaon, Tehsil Kandaghat, District Solan, H.P.
11. In paragraph No.2 of the plaint, it is averred that the afore system continued upto the year 1965 BK. In the afore samvat, on account of reorganisation of the State of Sirmour, the village wherein the suit land occurred, hence fell to the domain of State of Patiala. In the revenue record, an entry was made as "Mandir Devi Lagasan" Bahey Tamam RamSingh son of Hukmi, Bali Ram son of Magni Cast Bhardwaj Saknandeh Hazsa Bahissa Barabar Pujarian, Makbuja Mohatmimnans." The condition of grant of suit land as Muafi to the temple(s), was subject to the existence of the temple, and, also subject to the condition of the Mohatmims' good conduct, and theirs doing Dhoop, Pooja on a day today basis. The plaintiffs averred that previously there is no departure from the afore conditions, and, there is also no departure nowat from the afore conditions hence at the instance of the plaintiffs. The above factum remains not controverted.
Therefore, a conclusion spurs that none of the conditions of the grant became breached, nor hence the grant was amenable for rescission.
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS...13...
12. A partition is averred to have taken place amongst .
the Mohatmims in the year 1956. Through the afore partition, Devi Ram was assigned the sole Mohatmimship of Mandir Devi Lagasan at village Karganoo; Shri Keshwa Ram was assigned Mohatmimship of village Noag, and Shri Hari Nand was assigned Mohatmimship of Village Dudham, and, Shri Het Ram was assigned Mohatmimship of Village Rehar, and, that all the afore four temples nomenclatured as Mandir Devi Lagasan are respectively located at Villages Noag, Rehar, Dudham and Karganoo. The pedigree table of the Mohatmims is extracted hereinafter:-
Magni Hukami
I I
_________I________________ Ram Singh
I I I
Palak Ram Het Ram Devi Ram
______________I_______ I
I I I
Keshwa Ram Hari Nand I I
I I
Jai Dutt Inder Dutt.
It is averred in the plaint, that all the four temples, hence suing as co-plaintiffs hence through their Mohatmims, were to be treated as separate units, and eight units of Mohatmims were to ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...14...
be taken into account, for the purpose of application of the Act, .
to the suit property.
12. Moreover, the plaintiff(s) averred, that through the orders made by the statutory authorities concerned, the afore respectively averred units became completely discarded, and, hence contended that the espoused declaratory decree be pronounced, vis-a-vis, the plaintiffs and against the defendants.
The averments carried in paragraph No.1 of the plaint, in so far as appertaining to the pointed stark fact, as carried therein, and, relating to four temples hence existing on or over the suit land, for about four hundred years, has not been specifically denied by the defendants, in their written statement. For lack of specific denial being meted to paragraph No.1 of the plaint, hence by the defendants, the latter is deemed to have accepted the veracity thereof.
13. Be that as it may, the defendants while meteing a reply to paragraph No.9 of the plaint, took a stand, that the main temple of Devi Lagasan is situated at village Naog, and, that the alienation as Muafi of the suit land, was only, vis-a-vis, the main temple of Devi Lagasan located at Naog, and, the temple (supra) ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...15...
is alone covered within the realm of the grant of land thereto .
hence as Muafi, and, that other sub temples of Devi Lagasan, as, are situated at different locations (supra), hence hold no right title or interest over the land granted, as Muafi, to Devi Lagasan temple located at Village Naog. Therefore, it is averred that only a single entity or a single unit, inasmuch, as, the principal temple of Devi Lagasan at Naog, was amenable to be treated as the unit concerned, as aptly done through the conclusive orders rendered by the statutory authorities concerned.
14. Though, as aforestated, for want of a specific denial being meted to paragraph No.1 of the plaint, inasmuch, as, four temples existing since 400 years over and upon the entire suit land, this Court had drawn a conclusion that the afore factum becomes proven. Moreover, aggravated momentum, to the afore drawn conclusion, ensues from PW-1 rather making in his examination-in-chief, a testification hence in completest tandem therewith, and, also when upon his being cross-examined by the learned ADA concerned, no elicitations being made from him, for reducing or diminishing the vigour of his testification, borne in his examination-in-chief, wherein, he has completely proven the ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...16...
averments carried in the plaint. Importantly, during the course .
of his cross-examination, he has made an echoing in respect of occurrence of partition inter se the Mohatmims of four temples hence dedicated to Devi Lagasan, and, that an entry qua therewith becoming borne in the relevant records. The afore echoing also does completely support, the averments carried in the plaint, with respect to the Mohatmims of four temples, who sue as as such for the co-plaintiff(s) in the extant suit, making partition of their respective Sehbatship, and, that the Sehabatship (supra) rather covering all the four co-plaintiff temples hence dedicated to Devi Lagasan.
15. The further legal effect of the afore made conclusion is that even, though the land was granted as Muafi, to Mandir Devi Lagasan, and, though ex-facie the afore grant pointedly singularises the grant as a Muafi rather only to Devi Lagsan.
However, the afore ex-facie grant of land, as a Muafi to a singular entity nomenclatured as Mandi Devi Lagasan, can not render effaced the afore drawn conclusion, wherefrom a sequel has arisen, that the four temples dedicated to Devi Lagsan, were evidently in existence since 400 years nor hence the afore grant ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...17...
can become construed to be made to a singular temple, .
inasmuch as only to Devi Lagasan, loacted at village Naog.
Therefore, dehors, singularity of grant(s), it covers for reasons supra, rather all four temples, dedicated to Devi Lagsan, and, hence located in different villages, and, besides also covers the different kahsra numbers, occurring in the grant, and, in respect whereof, a valid unrebutted partition has occurred inter se the Mohatmims. Conspicuously, the further effect(s) of wants of any specific denial by the defendants to para No.1 of the plaint, hence qua existence of four temples over the suit land since four hundred years, is that, the apposite assignment of suit land, as Muafi, embodies the entire expanse thereof, rather obviously also it becoming dedicated to all four temples, dehors the grant singularising the assignment thereto to one. Therefore, all were to be treated as separate units for the relevant purposes.
16. Moreover, the defendants failed to adduce any evidence on record making vivid displays that the condition, of grant of land, as Muafi to the temple(s), through their respective Mohatmims, becoming breached hence rendering amenable for rescission, the apposite grant, inasmuch, as, theirs not ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...18...
performing their duties or theirs not doing regular puja.
.
Therefore, for want of evidence existing on record, and its displaying, that no puja was regularly performed for is performed, besides displaying that the Mohatmims concerned, were of an unchaste character, hence, this Court concludes, that the respective Mohatmims of the co-plaintiff temples, did not breach any condition, and, rather hence the grant as made to the co-plaintiff temples cannot become rescinded.
17. Though, finality, and, conclusivity become attached to the orders, previously made by the statutory authorities concerned. However, as aforestated, the afore fastening of statutory conclusivity and finality, to the orders passed by the statutory authorities concerned, rather would wane and would become blunted, upon manifest displays emerging, vis-a-vis, the statutory authorities concerned, breaching the principle(s) of natural justice and/or contravening the mandate of apposite statutory principles. In case, a reading of the verdicts, as, drawn by the statutory authorities concerned, the afore exception to the general principle(s), that in respect of matters covered under the Act, civil courts are barred to exercise jurisdiction, rather ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...19...
becomes unfolded, thereupon, this Court would proceed to .
validate the impugned verdict.
18. In the afore endeavour, a reading of the penultimate paragraph carried in the order made by the Collector Kandaghat, para whereof stands extracted hereinafter:-
The personal land belonging to the Mohtamims can be tagged with that of the deities which has been rightly pointed out by the counsel and as such it should not be include din the final statement. Since is true about the "Gair Mumkin" land which should also be excluded from the holding of the landlord. The affidavits have been filed to substantiate that there are four temples and deities and that the Mohatmims and each deity is entitled to get separate unit, but on the similar lines it can not be accepted because the landlord as per revenue record is one i.e. "Devi Lagasan" of Naog with only one temple and as such under the provision of the H.P. Ceiling of Land Holdings Act, 1972, Devi Lagasan would be treated as one institution and in another words as one landlord.
discloses that he had hence repelled the contention of the plaintiff temples, that each of them were amenable for being ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...20...
treated, as, separate units, rather merely upon affidavits being .
exchanged. He had hence belied the affidavits as become furnished before him, by the Mohatmims of the respective temples, only on the ground, that the grant of the suit land as Muafi, was only to a singular entity nomenclatured, as Devi Lagasan, Naog, and, factum whereof, becomes borne in the relevant revenue record. Since the proceedings drawn in the special statute are summary in nature, thereupon, exchange of affidavits amongst the contesting litigants, may be, the befitting and efficacious mode to decide the lis. Even though, this Court cannot for mere lack of sufficiency or inadequacy of opportunities in the proceedings drawn by the authorities concerned, hence become constrained to interfere with the conclusive, and, binding decision as becomes recorded by them.
However, the pleadings carried in the afore case, the echoings in the affidavits concerned, and, also the further imperative necessity of, in the relevant proceedings, rather each of the Mohatmim(s) stepping into the witness box, for proving the contents carried in their respective affidavits, and, thereafter theirs being cross-examined by the learned ADA, never became ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...21...
placed on record before the learned Civil court concerned.
.
Since, only upon placing on record, of the afore material, this court would became convinced, that at least the fullest opportunities became afforded to each of the contesting litigants, to support their respective versions , and, as would ensue to them only upon each of the Mohatmim(s) of the afore temples, rather stepping into the witness box, and, thereafter theirs being cross-examined, besides also upon theirs being permitted to lead evidence in rebuttal, to the one, as become relied upon by the pleader, representing the quarter concerned.
Furthermore, thereupon alone this court would become facilitated, to draw a firm conclusion, that the completest compliance became meted hence by the authorities concerned, to the principles of natural justice. Moreover, only upon the afore principle becoming not breached, this Court would validate their respectively made orders. However, since as aforestated none of the afore material became placed on record, thereupon, this Court is constrained to conclude that the statutory authorities concerned, acted in a perfunctory, and, in a slip shod manner, and, also breached the principles of natural justice. Therefore, ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...22...
the further sequel thereof, is that the statutory authorities .
concerned, also did not mete the completest compliance to the statutory provisions, as,become carried in the Act, and, appertaining to the permissibility of retention of purported surplus area, by the four temples, and, as ensued to them from theirs being treated as four temples located at different locations, dehors the grant being made to a singular entity.
Since, for reasons (supra), on anvil of evidence on record of utmost probative vigour, this Court has inferred that rather all four temples were in receipt of the grant, and, were to be treated as separate units. Therefore, in face thereof, the breach of statutory provisions as committed by the authorities concerned warrants its being undone.
19. Even otherwise, the issue with respect to the jurisdiction was to be attempted to be decided as a preliminary issue. The afore motion was to be made before the Civil Court concerned by the ADA concerned. However, the afore motion for the issue of jurisdiction being decided as a preliminary issue, hence prior to the entering upon by the learned Civil Court of trial of the civil suit, through its proceeding to record the ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...23...
respective evidence(s) of the contesting litigants, did not ever .
come to be made, before the trial Court, rather by the learned ADA. The effect of the afore omission of the State of H.P. is hence qua its being concluded to deem to waive and abandon the issue of jurisdiction, more so, when the entire evidence has been adduced upon each of the issues struck by the learned trial Court. Since, the adduced evidence completely supports the averments carried in the plaint, therefore, since the completest opportunity to each of the contesting litigants has been afforded to each to contest the lis, within the four corners of the apposite statute, and, which earlier did not come to be granted to the plaintiffs. Consequently, this Court concludes that the Civil Court held the jurisdiction to entertain, try and decide the lis.
Significantly, also when the material on record is amply suggestive of non application of the relevant statutory provisions by the statutory authorities, to the lis concerned, inference whereof becomes aroused from breaches being visited, vis-a-vis, the principles of natural justice.
20. The above discussion, unfolds, that the conclusions as arrived by the learned first Appellate Court, being based, upon ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS ...24...
a proper and mature appreciation of evidence on record. While .
rendering the findings, the learned first Appellate Court has not, excluded germane and apposite material from consideration.
Accordingly, the substantial question of law is answered in favour of the respondents/plaintiffs, and, against the appellants/defendants.
21. In view of the above discussion, the present Regular Second Appeal is dismissed. In sequel, the judgement and decree rendered by the learned First Appellate Court is maintained and affirmed. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. All pending applications also stand disposed of. No order as to costs.
(Sureshwar Thakur) Judge 27th August, 2021.
(jai) ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:31 :::CIS