Allahabad High Court
Administrator General, U.P. Allahabad vs Narendra Pal Singh (Decd.) Through ... on 19 July, 2000
Equivalent citations: 2000(4)AWC2662
Author: M. C. Jain
Bench: M.C. Jain
JUDGMENT M. C. Jain, J.
1. Applications : A-157, A-158 and A-I59.--The dispute relates to the estate of one Kunwar Girwar Singh, who died on 24.5.1971 leaving behind agricultural land and vast immovable properties situate in different cities of the State including Agra. He left behind neither any issue nor any near relative. Many persons claiming right to the properties by him filed testamentary suits. The Administrator General also filed testamentary suit claiming Letters of Administration in respect of the estate of the deceased. By judgment dated 1.8.8.1977 of this Court, all the suits were decided. Except the suit filed by the Administrator General, all of them were dismissed. This Court issued Letters of Administration to the Administrator General, U. P., in respect of the estate of the deceased with the direction that he would manage the properties till the rights of the parties are determined by civil court. Various appeals filed against the judgment dated 18.8.1977 were also dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court on 23.10.1981.
2. Later on, the Administrator General made an application to this Court (A-155) being Misc. Application No. 28409 of 1998 under Section 25 of the Administrator General Act seeking direction to permit him to dispose of by transfer the uneconomical Immovable properties of the deceased which were under his administration and were shown in Annexure-2 to the application. By order dated 8.9.1998, this Court allowed the application of the Administrator General. The controversy at hand relates to the property situate at Agra, viz., building No. 21/115. Dhuliyaganj, Agra, which too finds place in Annexure-2 to the application A-155 that had been moved by the Administrator General under Section 25 of the Administrator General Act seeking direction to permit him to dispose of by transfer the uneconomical Immovable properties of the deceased.
3. A-157 is an application by C.P. Public Inter College, Dhuliyaganj, Agra, through its Manager Surendra Pal Singh for staying the operation of the order dated 8.9.1998. A-158 is another application by the said applicant for recalling the said order dated 8.9.1998 in respect of the property aforesaid. An affidavit has been filed in support of the aforesaid application. A-159 is another application by the said applicant for being impleaded as respondent in the case. It is also supported by an affidavit of Surendra Pal Singh, Manager of the institution. The pith and substance of the case put forth by the said applicant is that the property in question really belongs to C.P. Public Junior High School, now called C.P. Public Inter College, Dhuliyaganj, Agra, since 5.11.1963 on which date it was purchased by the said institution through a registered sale deed executed by Ram Raksha Pal Singh. History of the ownership of this property has been traced that earlier it belonged to Smt. Chandra Kala Devi, wife of Kunwar Girwar Singh. Smt. Chandra Kala Devi was the daughter of Smt. Gopi Devi wife of Chhatra Pal Singh. Gopi Debi had acquired the same from Banaras Bank Ltd., Agra by a registered sale deed dated 16.7.1942. Ram Raksha Pal Singh was the brother of Smt. Chandra Kala Devi. After the death of Gopi Devi the said property had devolved upon Smt. Chandra Kala Devi wife of Kunwar Girwar Singh. In 1951 Original Suit No. 469 of 1951. Smt. Chandra Kala Devi v. Chhatra Pal Singh and others was filed in the Court of Munsif, Agra, for ejectment and recovery which was partly decreed on 25.4.1953. On 5.11.1963 Ram Raksha Pal Singh sold the property in question to C.P. Public Junior High School, Agra. Copy of the sale deed has been annexed as Annexure-2 to the affidavit. The name of C. P. Public Junior High School, Dhuliyaganj, Agra, now called C. P. Public Inter College, Dhuliyaganj, Agra, was mutated also in revenue records in pursuance of the sale deed dated 5.11.1963. It has also been submitted that after the death of Smt. Chandra Kala Devi, her husband Kunwar Girwar Singh had tried to execute the Judgment and decree dated 25.4.1953, passed by Munsif. Agra in O.S. No. 469 of 1951 but he failed for want of locus standi. Copy of the order dated 12.8.1969 passed by the then Munsif, Agra has been filed as Annexure-6 to the affidavit. It is stated that the property never belonged to and had never been in possession of Kunwar Girwar Singh in respect of whose estate Letters of Administration had been granted to the Administrator General by this Court on 18.8.1977 without considering the above facts and the impact of the judgment dated 25.4.1953 and 12.8.1969 in execution proceedings arising therefrom.
4. A-170 and A-173 are the affidavits filed from the side of Administrator General, A-176 is the rejoinder-affidavit filed by the applicant. The opposition from the side of Administrator General of both the applications made by the applicant is founded on these grounds. The property in question is part of the estate of late Kunwar Girwar Singh as entrusted to the Administrator General for the purposes of administration under the order of this Court dated 18.8.1977 which is a judgment in rem. Therefore, at this stage, no person has any valid subsisting right, interest or title over the same and there can be no question of impleading the applicant as a party. Smt. Chandra Kala Devi wife of Kunwar Girwar Singh had acquired part of the said property from her mother and partly through the sale deed dated 13.12.1950 executed in her favour by her brother Ram Raksha Pal Singh. Copy of the said sale deed has been filed as Annexure-CA 1 to affidavit A-170 put forth from the side of Administrator General. After the execution of the sale deed dated 13.12.1950, Ram Raksha Pal Singh severed all his rights and interest in the said property and Smt. Chandra Kala Devi became its exclusive owner. The share of Ram Raksha Pal Singh in the said property was purchased by Kunwar Girwar Singh through the aforesaid sale deed in the name of his wife and the sale consideration was also paid by him C.P. Public Inter College did not acquire any valid right in the said property by sale deed dated 5.11.1963 allegedly executed by Ram Raksha Pal Singh who had no subsisting right in the said property after 13.12.1950. The Judgment passed in O.S. No. 469 of 1951 in no way affects the rights of the Administrator General to administer the property in dispute, Smt. Chandra Kala Devi predeceased her husband and was succeeded by him, namely, Kunwar Girwar Singh. Mutation of municipal records does not confer ownership or title in favour of the applicant. The order dated 12.8.1969 passed in Execution Case arising out of O.S. No. 469 of 1951 is not binding on the Administrator General. The applicant is only occupying part of the first floor and the other portions are in possession of the tenants who are paying rent to the Administrator General.
5. In the rejoinder-affidavit A-176 filed from the side of the applicant, the earlier averments have been reiterated. It has also been averred that Smt. Chandra Kala Devi died in 1959 and upon her death the property in question devolved on her brother Ram Raksha Pal Singh, who sold the same to the applicant by sale deed dated 5.11.1963. Smt. Gopi Devi had allegedly purchased the property in question in 1942 out of her stridhan.
6. I have heard Sri B. B. Paul, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pankaj Mithal, learned counsel for Administrator General. I have also carefully gone through the record. There can be no doubt about this legal position that the judgment of this Court dated 18.8.1977 granting Letters of Administration to the Administrator General. U. P. In respect of estate of the deceased including the disputed property is a 'judgment in rem'. In other words, the Administrator General has a right to manage the disputed property comprised in the estate of the deceased till the applicant succeeds in getting his title, if any, declared in respect of the same by competent civil court. Therefore, there can be no question of permitting the impleadment of the applicant in these proceedings at this stage. Consequently, the application A-159 moved by the applicant for impleadment is liable to be rejected.
7. The other contention of the applicant raising objection against the sale of the property in question by the Administrator General should now be taken up. The matter has to be viewed in the light of the material placed on record. It appears from the perusal of the judgment dated 25.4.1953 passed by Munsif. Agra. In O.S. Wo. 469 of 1951, Smt. Chandra Kala Devi v. Chhatrapal Singh and others, that it was a suit for rent and ejectment. The claim for ejectment was dismissed, but it was decreed for arrears of rent. The defendant No. 1 Chhatrapal Singh was said to be running a private school in the premises as Manager. Defendant No. 2 was the school. The judgment shows that Kunwar Glrwar Slngh-husband of Smt. Chandra Kala Devi had appeared as P.W. 1 in that case and stated that Smt. Chandra Kala Devi's mother had purchased the house herself and it was her stridhan. After the death of the mother of Smt. Chandra Kala Devi, the property was said to have devolved on her (Smt. Chandra Kala Devi) as her heir which was said to be her stridhan. It also appears from the order dated 12.8,1969 passed in Misc. Case No. 106 of 1967, relating to execution proceedings arising out of O.S. No 469 of 1951 that Kunwar Girwar Singh could not succeed in executing the decree. On the objection raised by the J.Ds, the Court observed that the property in question having admittedly been inherited by Smt. Chandra Kala Devi from her mother, as per Section 15(2) of the Hindu Succession Act after her death. It was to devolve, not upon her husband Kunwar Girwar Singh but on the heirs of the father of Smt. Chandra Kala Devi. It is to be noted that Chhatra Pal Singh who executed the sale deed dated 5.11.1963 in respect of the disputed property in favour of C. P. Public Junior High School was the brother of Smt. Chandra Kala Devi and the heir of her father. Section 15(1) of the Hindu Succession Act says that the property of a female Hindu dying intestate shall devolve according to rules set out in Rule 16, firstly, upon the sons and daughters (including the children of any predeceased son or daughter) and the husband, and then upon others as mentioned in the said sub-section. However, sub-section (2) of Section 15 makes an exception to the above rule and provides that any property inherited by a female Hindu from the father or mother shall devolve, in the absence of any son or daughter of the deceased (including children of any predeceased son or daughter) not upon the other heirs referred to in sub-section (1) in the order specified therein, but upon the heirs of the father. In this view of the matter, the contention from the side of the applicant is not wholly unfounded or without substance. It, at least requires scrutiny in a proper trial before a competent court as to who succeeded to the disputed property after the death of Smt. Chandra Kala Devi in 1959. Though the suit of 1951 referred to above was of rent and ejectment in which the title was not to be decided, but the fact remains that Kunwar Girwar Singh (husband of Smt. Chandra Kala Devi) remained unsuccessful in executing the decree passed in that suit as heir of his wife Smt. Chandra Kala Devi with the observation of the Court that he had not succeeded to the said property and the same could not devolve upon him for the reason that it had been inherited by his wife from her mother and after her death, it was to go back to the heirs of his wife's father. As per sub-section (2) of Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act. Ram Raksha Pal Singh, who executed the sale deed dated 5.11.1963 in favour of the applicant, being brother of Smt. Chandra Kala Devi, was the heir of her father, who was to succeed to the property in question. It has to be noted that Kunwar Girwar Singh died on 24.5.1971. However, it does not appear that he took any steps during his lifetime to assert or getting declared his title in respect of the disputed property.
8. So far as the sale deed dated 13.12.1950 executed by Ram Raksha Pal Singh in favour of her sister Smt. Chandra Kala Devi in respect of half share in the disputed property is concerned, it contains a different recital that during her lifetime his mother Gopl Devi (who was the owner of the property having purchased the same from Banaras Bank Ltd. In 1942) had executed a will deed in his favour and in favour of Smt. Chandra Kala Devi. If it were so, it requires scrutiny at a proper trial as to who was to succeed to the half share purchased by her from her brother and what was the nature of her title in respect of other half portion which she got from her mother through will. On the face of it, be such recital in the sale deed cannot be reconciled with the statement of her husband that the property in question was purchased by Gopi Devi--mother of Smt. Chandra Kala Devi and it was her stridhan and that after the death of Gopi Devi the property became the stridhan of Smt. Chandra Kala Devi alone. It is also noted that in sale deed dated 5.11.1963 executed by Ram Raksha Pal Singh in favour of C. P. Public Junior High School, he claimed title in respect of the same by adverse possession and refuted the deed got executed by Smt. Chandra Kala Devi from him as being the product of fraud and misrepresentation and to be illegal, though it does not appear that he brought any action for the cancellation of the same. The situation at present is somewhat fluid presenting a hazy picture. All the above important aspects have to be deeply probed and gone into at a proper trial before a competent court. It can only be inferred at present that the claim of title in respect of the disputed property in favour of Ram Raksha Pal Singh (who executed the sale deed dated 5.11.1963 in favour of school) is not wholly unfounded or built on straw.
9. It may also be stated as a passing reference that on 7.2.1972, the Administrator General gave a notice to the Principal of the School informing that he had been authorised by this Court in Testamentary Case No. 1 of 1972 to collect and take possession of the estate of the deceased Kunwar Girwar Singh including the disputed property. Copy of the same is Annexure-3 to the rejoinder-affidavit A-176 filed by the applicant. The Principal of the school did give a reply dated 1.5.1972 to the Administrator General, inter alia, saying that he was only the employee of the school and as per his knowledge, the public school in question which was a registered society was the owner of the building. The order issuing Letters of Administration to the Administrator General was passed as late as on 18.8.1977 but it does not appear that the fact was placed on record from the side of Administrator General that the school in question was claiming the ownership in respect of this particular property. What I mean to say is that much before the grant of Letters of Administration, the school in question had started asserting ownership in respect of the property in question to the knowledge of the Administrator General. The point of the matter is that its claim founded on sale deed of 5.11.1963 executed by Ram Raksha Pal Singh (brother of Smt. Chandra Kala Devi) cannot be branded as wholly baseless at this stage as discussed hereinabove.
10. Judged in the light of the material placed on record and different aspects of the case discussed above, the applicant cannot be gagged from objecting to the sale of the property in question at this stage, simply on the premise that the grant of Letters of Administration to the Administrator General is 'judgment tn rem'. The sale of this property at this stage is likely to produce multifariousness and create complications.
11. In the circumstances, the proper course would be to let the Administrator General continue to manage the disputed property as per the Letters of Administration granted to him on 18.8.1977 but not to permit him to sell the same for a period of two years. In the meantime, the applicant may file a suit seeking declaration of its title in respect of the disputed property.
12. In conclusion, it is ordered as under :
1. Application A-159 moved by the applicant for impleadment is rejected.
2. The Administrator General shall continue to administer and manage the disputed property No. 21/115 Dhuliyaganj, Agra, as per the Letters of Administration granted under order dated 18.8.1977 but he shall not sell off the same for a period of two years from today. In case the applicant gets his title declared in respect of this property during the intervening period of two years, the future action shall take shape accordingly. In the eventuality of nothing materializing during this intervening period of two years, the Administrator General would be at liberty to approach this Court for further appropriate orders in respect of the disputed property. Applications A-157 and A-158 are disposed of accordingly.
The office is directed to list other pending applications for disposal.