Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.26 seconds)Church Of North Of India vs Lavajibhai Ratanjibhai & Ors on 3 May, 2005
In Church of North India v. Lavajibhai Ratanjibhai, (2005) 10 SCC 760, held that a plea of bar to jurisdiction of a civil court must be considered having regard to the contentions raised in the plaint. For the said purpose, averments disclosing cause of action and the reliefs sought for therein must be considered in their entirety. The court may not be justified in determining the question, one way or the other, only having regard to the reliefs claimed dehors the factual averments made in the plaint. The rules of pleadings postulate that a plaint must contain material facts.
Ram Awalamb And Ors. vs Jata Shankar And Ors. on 18 September, 1968
16. So far as the arguments that on the basis of sale deed dated 05.05.1997, the name of the petitioner has been recorded over plots 488, 487 and 494, which are subject-matter of sale deed and he is in possession over it and the suit is essentially a suit for declaration of title and possession over agricultural land, is concerned, title of the plaintiff is admitted on the date of sale deed. In case sale deed is canceled, there will be no requirement for declaration of the title of the plaintiff. Relief for ejectment of the petitioner and possession of the plaintiff being an ancillary relief can be granted by civil court also as held by this Court in Ram Awalamb's case (supra). The case law relied by the counsel for the petitioner, are applicable where declaration of title would be necessary for grant of relief to the plaintiff, while in this case, as stated above, title of the plaintiff on the date of sale deed is admitted and cancellation of sale deed is main relief.
Suraj Bhan & Ors vs Financial Commissioner & Ors on 16 April, 2007
Supreme Court in Suraj Bhan v. Financial Commr., (2007) 6 SCC 186, held that it is well settled that an entry in revenue records does not confer title on a person whose name appears in record-of-rights. Entries in the revenue records or jamabandi have only "fiscal purpose" i.e. payment of land revenue, and no ownership is conferred on the basis of such entries. So far as title to the property is concerned, it can only be decided by a competent civil court.
Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Registration Act, 1908
Section 9 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Kamla Prasad & Ors vs Sri Krishna Kant Pathak & Ors on 9 February, 2007
6. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that on the basis of sale deed dated 05.05.1997, the name of the petitioner has been recorded over plots 488, 487 and 494, which are subject-matter of sale deed and he is in possession over over it. At present, the petitioner is a recorded tenure holder and in possession of agricultural land i.e. plots 488, 487 and 494, which are subject-matter of sale deed as such the suit is essentially a suit for declaration of title and possession over agricultural land. Jurisdiction of civil court to try such suit is barred under Section 331 of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951. He relied upon the judgments Supreme Court in Kamla Prasad v. Krishna Kant Path, (2007) 4 SCC 213 and judgment of this Court in Kundan Singh Vs. Additional District Judge and others, 2009 Rajaswa Nirnay Sangah 59.
The Specific Relief Act, 1963
Shri K.L. Malhotra Son Of Late Shri ... vs The V Additional District Judge, The ... on 11 December, 2007
6. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that on the basis of sale deed dated 05.05.1997, the name of the petitioner has been recorded over plots 488, 487 and 494, which are subject-matter of sale deed and he is in possession over over it. At present, the petitioner is a recorded tenure holder and in possession of agricultural land i.e. plots 488, 487 and 494, which are subject-matter of sale deed as such the suit is essentially a suit for declaration of title and possession over agricultural land. Jurisdiction of civil court to try such suit is barred under Section 331 of U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951. He relied upon the judgments Supreme Court in Kamla Prasad v. Krishna Kant Path, (2007) 4 SCC 213 and judgment of this Court in Kundan Singh Vs. Additional District Judge and others, 2009 Rajaswa Nirnay Sangah 59.