PREMJI RATANSEY SHAH Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(SC)-1994-7-63
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: BOMBAY)
Decided on July 22,1994

Premji Ratansey Shah Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

RUKHIBEN VS. KIRITKUMAR KANTILAL PATEL [LAWS(GJH)-1997-9-19] [FOLLOWED]
LAKSHMAN VS. JAYASHREE AND OTHERS [LAWS(KAR)-2017-12-78] [REFERRED TO]
MALTIBAI VS. SUBHASHCHANDRA [LAWS(MPH)-2001-11-43] [REFERRED TO]
NISHAN SINGH VS. BHARAT INDUSTRY WORKS [LAWS(P&H)-1998-2-147] [REFERRED TO]
K RAJENDRAN VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2013-8-179] [REFERRED TO]
ADARSH P. JAUHAR VS. GULSHAN JAIN AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2014-1-541] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA THROUGH DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, YAMUNA NAGAR VS. MURTI MARI GUGA PEER MANDIR AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2019-5-473] [REFERRED TO]
V.RAKESHAK VS. SURJEET SINGH BHURJI [LAWS(HPH)-1998-3-18] [REFERRED TO]
TEK CHAND AND ORS. VS. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2015-10-295] [REFERRED TO]
VASSUDEV NENE VS. DATTATRAYA RAGHUNATH JOG [LAWS(BOM)-1999-3-93] [REFERRED TO]
VYANKAATI RAGHOBAJI PARBAT VS. VARSHA VINOD DESHPANDE [LAWS(BOM)-2004-10-18] [REFERRED TO]
N.P.VIJAYARAGHAVAN VS. AYACHANDRAN [LAWS(KER)-2024-1-3] [REFERRED TO]
PUSHPADASAN VS. SHEELA JERALD [LAWS(KER)-2014-10-173] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. ASHWATHA DEVELOPERS VS. SHREE VARDHAMAN STANAKVASI JAIN [LAWS(BOM)-2016-3-7] [REFERRED TO]
SRI DURGA KALA MANDIR VS. S. PULLA RAO [LAWS(APH)-2014-10-128] [REFERRED TO]
HAR BHAGWAN BATRA VS. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [LAWS(DLH)-1996-1-102] [REFERRED]
NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORTATION VS. AMRIT MEHTA & ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2016-9-41] [REFERRED TO]
M. RAMAMOORTHY AND ORS. VS. R. THIRUNAVUKKARASU [LAWS(MAD)-2015-7-17] [REFERRED TO]
YOUSAF MASIH VS. J S YUHANNA [LAWS(P&H)-2010-3-270] [REFERRED]
HANUMAN RAM VS. ANADA RAM [LAWS(RAJ)-2006-5-364] [REFERRED TO]
GOVINDASWAMY PILLAI VS. MARUDAN [LAWS(MAD)-1998-4-168] [REFERRED TO]
ARULMIGHU AMMACHI AYYANAR MANDU KOIL SENNAGARAMPATTI VILLAGE VS. ALAGU KARUPPANNAN AMBALAM [LAWS(MAD)-1995-2-74] [REFERRED TO]
JASWANT SINGH VS. CHIEF MUNICIPAL OFFICER [LAWS(MPH)-2000-11-18] [REFERRED TO]
SARDARA SINGH VS. KASHMIR CHAND [LAWS(HPH)-2024-6-27] [REFERRED TO]
MAL SINGH VS. DES RAJ AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2017-4-171] [REFERRED TO]
BHAJAN SINGH AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2018-2-33] [REFERRED TO]
BOMBAY ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION GROUP VS. A R BHARATI DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST [LAWS(BOM)-2003-9-42] [REFERRED TO]
BANI KANTA MEDHI VS. HIMADRI KISHORE DAS [LAWS(GAU)-2017-2-30] [REFERRED TO]
MUMBAI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT LTD VS. INDAMER COMPANY PVT LTD [LAWS(BOM)-2008-7-236] [REFERRED TO]
ASHWATHA DEVELOPERS AND ORS VS. VARDHAMAN STANAKVASI JAIN AND ORS [LAWS(BOM)-2016-3-219] [REFERRED]
JAGDISH PRASAD AND ORS. VS. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2007-3-222] [REFERRED TO]
REKHA GHOSH VS. CHANCHAL SINHA ROY [LAWS(CAL)-2000-2-29] [REFERRED TO]
VIJAY SPORTS CLUB VS. VIJAY SPORTS CLUB [LAWS(CAL)-2021-2-33] [REFERRED TO]
GOVINDASAMY VS. MUNUSAMY [LAWS(MAD)-2017-7-206] [REFERRED TO]
RAGHUNATHDAS VAISHNAV VS. MUNICIPAL BOARD, NATHDWARA [LAWS(RAJ)-2019-5-26] [REFERRED TO]
DUNGAR DASS AND ORS. VS. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2008-2-338] [REFERRED TO]
KOLLURU SUDHAKAR RAO VS. POLINENI NAGABHUSHANAM [LAWS(APH)-2022-4-7] [REFERRED TO]
RAJIV GANDHI NAGAR RAHIVASI WELFARE SOCIETY VS. MHADA [LAWS(BOM)-2003-9-41] [REFERRED TO]
RAHIMBHAI AHEMADBHAI LEHARI VS. GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION [LAWS(GJH)-2023-4-2435] [REFERRED TO]
VIDYAWATI GUPTA VS. BHAKTI HARI NAYAK [LAWS(CAL)-2004-4-24] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. B.D. AGARWAL & CO. & ANR. VS. NARYAN PRASAD BHOTICA & ANR. [LAWS(CAL)-2015-8-108] [REFERRED TO]
RAMACHANDIRAN VS. SARASWATHY [LAWS(MAD)-2014-12-308] [REFERRED TO]
GURCHARAN SINGH VS. PUNJAB MANDI BOARD [LAWS(P&H)-1998-7-72] [REFERRED]
OM PARKASH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-1997-7-184] [REFERRED TO]
GANESHI AND OTHERS VS. BEDI RAM AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-1996-4-153] [REFERRED]
S MARIMUTHU VS. G KUMARASWAMY [LAWS(MAD)-1996-4-104] [REFERRED TO]
S MARIMUTHU VS. G KUMARASWAMY [LAWS(MAD)-1996-4-104] [REFERRED TO]
MUNIAMMAL VS. MUTHU GOUNDER DIED [LAWS(MAD)-2003-2-55] [REFERRED TO]
RAMUBHAI DAHYABHAI RATHOD VS. SURAT MUNICIPAL CORPORATION [LAWS(GJH)-2000-2-1] [REFERRED]
JIT SINGH VS. SARDARA SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-2000-7-140] [REFERRED TO]
SAHEED SPORTING CLUB AND ANR. VS. KALYAN RAY CHOUDHURY [LAWS(ORI)-2008-8-135] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHAN CHAND VS. AMAR NATH & OTHERS. [LAWS(HPH)-2016-6-73] [REFERRED TO]
STANDARD CHARTERED BANK VS. ANDHRA BANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD [LAWS(BOM)-1997-9-116] [REFERRED TO (PARA 11). 2.]
GRAM PANCHAYAT, MUNDLIYAN, TEHSIL TOHANA VS. BAWRIA [LAWS(P&H)-1996-5-127] [REFERRED TO]
NIRBHAY SINGH BRAR VS. JAGDEEP SINGH DHINDSA [LAWS(P&H)-2022-7-145] [REFERRED TO]
B M Devarajapa VS. Sri. Marappa S/o. late Lakshmaiah [LAWS(KAR)-2011-12-138] [REFERRED TO]
AMIT DIXIT VS. SMT. SADHANA SINGH AND OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-2015-9-78] [REFERRED TO]
JIYA LAL VS. MUNI LAL [LAWS(P&H)-2000-4-99] [REFERRED TO]
CHAND SINGH VS. GANGADHAR [LAWS(P&H)-2005-11-8] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMED SULEMAN S/O SHRI CHAND MOHAMMED VS. MUNCIPAL BOARD, SALUMBER [LAWS(RAJ)-2017-8-108] [REFERRED TO]
SHYONATH AND ORS. VS. RAJASTHAN BOARD OF REVENUE AJMER AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-5-90] [REFERRED TO]
DURAIKANNU VS. SANKAR [LAWS(MAD)-2018-1-266] [REFERRED TO]
MUNUSAMY GOUNDER VS. SADASIVAM [LAWS(MAD)-2005-1-16] [REFERRED TO]
ANUPAM REKADI CABIN ASSOCIATION VS. JAMNAGAR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION [LAWS(GJH)-1994-12-25] [REFERRED]
GUR DAI VS. ARJAN SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-1996-9-63] [REFERRED TO]
BABAJAN MOHAMMED IBRAHIM VS. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION CORPORATION OF GREATER BOMBAY [LAWS(BOM)-2003-5-15] [REFERRED TO]
MANOJ A S DHARGALKAR ALIAS KULKARNI VS. TARAMATI HARICHANDRA SALGAONKAR [LAWS(BOM)-2000-4-38] [REFERRED TO]
DAU RAM VS. HIFJUL JAMIL (DIED) [LAWS(CHH)-2020-12-13] [REFERRED TO]
MOHINI AND ORS. VS. B. THIMMAPPA AND ORS. [LAWS(KER)-2015-8-137] [REFERRED TO]
MUHAMMAD ISMAYIL VS. SAIBINISHA NELPURAKUNNI VEEDU [LAWS(KER)-2017-8-173] [REFERRED TO]
PREMWATI VS. DDA [LAWS(DLH)-2011-3-104] [REFERRED TO]
NAMGYAL INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON LADAKHI ART AND CULTURE AND ANR. VS. TURNER MORRISON LTD. [LAWS(DLH)-2010-1-380] [REFERRED TO]
ASHU SONKAR VS. VTH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE KANPUR [LAWS(ALL)-1999-9-240] [REFERRED TO]
ANIL SHARMA VS. CHAUDHARY RAVINDER KUMAR [LAWS(DLH)-2017-2-78] [REFERRED TO]
SHANTI BAI VS. NARBADA AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2019-7-26] [REFERRED TO]
MUKHTIAR SINGH VS. BUA DITTA [LAWS(P&H)-2017-4-62] [REFERRED TO]
PARMINDER KAUR VS. AMARJIT KAUR [LAWS(P&H)-2018-7-108] [REFERRED TO]
BANSIDHAR MURUDI VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2008-5-45] [REFERRED TO]
S ASHOKAN VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2015-4-199] [REFERRED TO]
HARNIV SANDHU VS. SANDEEP SINGH SANDHU [LAWS(P&H)-1998-7-91] [REFERRED TO]
SUKHWANT SINGH VS. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER [LAWS(P&H)-2009-4-130] [REFERRED TO]
MUNICIPALITY GHARAUNDA VS. TARA CHAND AND ORS [LAWS(P&H)-2010-3-278] [REFERRED]
SHAMIM MULLA N MULLA VS. HUSSEINBHAI ALIAS MITHUBHAI [LAWS(BOM)-1998-8-4] [REFERRED TO]
SURINDER KAUR VS. AMARJIT KAUR [LAWS(P&H)-2001-4-60] [REFERRED TO]
SATYA PAL HANDA S/O SH. BRIJ LAL HANDA, CHANDIGARH VS. KANTA HANDA W/O LATE SH. SURAJ PARKASH HANDA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2012-9-122] [REFERRED TO]
MUKTIPADA SARKAR VS. H K MALLICK and CO [LAWS(CAL)-2003-9-61] [REFERRED TO]
SMT. INDU VS. SHRI. SRI KISHAN & ANR. [LAWS(DLH)-2016-10-16] [REFERRED TO]
MAYA JETHANANDA DARYANI VS. AVTAR MOHAN SINGH [LAWS(DLH)-2003-11-132] [REFERRED TO]
C BHASKAR VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-1994-12-33] [DISTINGUISHED]
MIRZA MOHAMMED YOUSUF BAIG VS. DECCAN ENTERPRISES BANGALORE [LAWS(KAR)-1996-2-2] [FOLLOWED ON]
M.C. SMITHA VS. G. SRINIVAS [LAWS(KAR)-2015-7-198] [REFERRED TO]
U MALLANNA GOWDA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA; PRINCIPLE SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT [LAWS(KAR)-2015-7-441] [REFERRED]
SHARMA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY VS. RAMDAS GOVINDA WAGDE [LAWS(BOM)-2019-10-119] [REFERRED TO]
ARJUN DASHRAT BHADE VS. KALABAI KASHINATH KOTHIMBIRE AND ORS. [LAWS(BOM)-2020-5-134] [REFERRED TO]
QUTUBDDIN SHAIKH VS. NANDANVAN CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING [LAWS(BOM)-2021-1-177] [REFERRED TO]
TONGONAGAON TEA CO. LTD. VS. UTTAM DAS [LAWS(GAU)-2020-3-164] [REFERRED TO]
ABHA TYAGI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2010-11-126] [REFERRED TO]
DANABHAI RAMBHAI VADHER VS. KARSHANBHAI RAMBHAI VADHER [LAWS(GJH)-2021-10-1482] [REFERRED TO]
SARASWATI KUNJ VS. L N GADODIA [LAWS(DLH)-2008-11-6] [REFERRED TO]
ATHARWA BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS VS. GRAMODYOGIK SHIKSHAN MANDAL [LAWS(BOM)-2010-4-203] [REFERRED TO]
KANHAIYA SINGH SHAKYA VS. LAKSHMI BAI [LAWS(MPH)-2022-9-63] [REFERRED TO]
WOODLANDS ESTATE APARTMENT OWNERS ASSOCIATION JAGA VS. E S SABUKUTTAN [LAWS(KER)-2017-6-210] [REFERRED TO]
MAGAN VS. RAMJI [LAWS(RAJ)-2023-9-196] [REFERRED TO]
SMT. CHANDRA KUMARI VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS [LAWS(RAJ)-1999-9-89] [REFERRED TO]
TEJ KAUR VS. SARWAN SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-2000-5-129] [REFERRED TO]
AMARJIT KAUR VS. JASBIR SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-2018-9-105] [REFERRED TO]
OM PARKASH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-1998-7-77] [REFERRED]
SINGARAVELU MUDALIAR VS. LAKSHMI AMMAL [LAWS(MAD)-1997-4-27] [REFERRED TO]
MADHO PARSHAD VS. RAM KISHAN [LAWS(DLH)-2001-7-44] [REFERRED 4.]
AMIT CHAUHAN VS. SAMLESH AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-12-213] [REFERRED TO]
RAM NARESH VS. BACHCHI SINGH AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-12-259] [REFERRED TO]
SHAW WALLACE and CO LTD VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2004-1-30] [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL MODEL SCHOOL VS. GOJER BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITED [LAWS(CAL)-2001-4-18] [REFERRED TO]
SUVOMOY CHATTERJEE VS. ARUNOY CHATTERJEE [LAWS(CAL)-2019-8-37] [REFERRED TO]
GURU RAVIDAS JAINTI SAMAROH SAMITI (REGD ) VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2018-11-133] [REFERRED TO]
SMT. URMIL GUPTA VS. COMMISSIONER [LAWS(HPH)-2017-7-51] [REFERRED TO]
SONAM CHOMDAN & ANOTHER VS. RANJIT SINGH [LAWS(HPH)-2017-8-52] [REFERRED TO]
SARWAN DASS VS. SALAM JEET [LAWS(HPH)-2002-10-1] [REFERRED TO]
K KARUPPANNA GOUNDER VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2007-3-187] [REFERRED TO]
KAMALAMMAL VS. INDIRANI AMMAL [LAWS(MAD)-1998-4-151] [REFERRED TO]
JAGJITSINGH BHAGSINGH ARORA VS. VIBHABEN RAJPAL TYAGI [LAWS(GJH)-2012-7-364] [REFERRED TO]
RAVI SONKAR & ORS. VS. STATE & ORS. [LAWS(MPH)-2002-4-124] [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. KISHANCHAND RAMCHAND CO [LAWS(GJH)-1995-4-10] [RELIED ON]
RARANDHIMANGALAM PANCHAYAT REP BY ITS PRESIDENT VS. THIAGARAJAN S/O KRIISHNAMOORTHY [LAWS(MAD)-2009-11-693] [REFERRED]
Gajendra Singh s/o Ramsingh VS. Mansingh [LAWS(MPH)-1999-12-49] [REFERRED TO]
DAMYANTI TOMER VS. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, KARNAL [LAWS(P&H)-2015-9-643] [REFERRED]
RAJASTHAN BOARD OF REVENUE AJMER & ORS. VS. SHYONATH & ANR. [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-5-351] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMMED VS. UNNI [LAWS(KER)-1999-1-42] [REFERRED TO]
GUARDIAN ANGEL ENGLISH MEDIUM H S VS. ST GEORGE YACOBAYA SYRIAN CHURCH [LAWS(KER)-2000-5-23] [REFERRED TO]
BHAGAT RAM VS. STATE OF H.P. [LAWS(HPH)-2023-9-56] [REFERRED TO]
ESAB INDIA LIMITED VS. BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR THE PORT OF KOLKATA [LAWS(CAL)-2007-6-71] [REFERRED TO]
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. BIRENDER SINGH AND ANOTHER [LAWS(DLH)-2016-10-108] [REFERRED TO]
HANUWANT SINGH SINCE DECEASED NOW REPRESENTED THROUGH LRS VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2017-9-162] [REFERRED TO]
TILAK RAJ AGGARWAL AND ANR. VS. DDA AND ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2009-1-266] [REFERRED TO]
SEVA KAUR VS. JOGENDRA KAUR [LAWS(CHH)-2019-1-64] [REFERRED TO]
SOPAN MARUTI THOPTE VS. PUNE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION [LAWS(BOM)-1996-2-32] [REFERRED TO]
VARINDER KUMAR AND ORS. VS. JAGDISH SINGLA AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2002-8-105] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The unsuccessful plaintiffs in both the Courts below are the petitioners. Their suit for declaration that the appellants are successors in title to certain land of defendants 3 and 4, namely, Sule and Thakkar, who were said to be its owners, which formed a portion of land admeasuring 33 acres 2 guntas in Survey No. 103-A/pt. at Kirol and for injunction not to interfere with their possession etc., was dismissed by a Single Judge sitting on the Original Side of the Bombay High Court. A Division Bench of the same Court dismissed the Appeal No. 557 of 1992 of the petitioner by the impugned judgment and decree dated 31-1-1994. The facts not in dispute are that a notification under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was initially published on 4-5-1959 proposing acquisition of 48.26 acres of land in Survey No. 103-A invoking the urgency clause under section 17. The enquiry under section 5-A was dispensed with. A declaration under section 6 was followed. Thereafter, another notification was issued on 28-5-1959 under section 4(1) of the Act acquiring 13 acres and 33 guntas in Survey No. 228 situated at Kurla. When possession was handed over to the railways on 24-5-1960, it was found that they had got possession of an excess of 12 acres 12 guntas in Survey No. 103-A. Therefore, third notification under section 4(1) was published on 13-7-1965 and the enquiry under section 5-A was conducted and section 6 declaration was made. For the lands covered in the first two notifications, award was made on 30-7-1966 and for the land covered by the third notification, an award was made on 26-5-1968. Thus, the award had become final. As stated earlier, possession was already taken and was handed over to the railways on 24-2-1960. Consequently, the original owner Mrs. Maibai @ Jamnabai had been divested of her title and had no interest to alienate part of land which 3rd and 4th defendants claimed to have purchased from her under a sale deed dated 21-8-1966, in that it had, by then, stood vested in the railways free of all encumbrances. Thereby, the purchasers got under the sale deed no right, title or interest in the land which had gone to the Central Government by then.
(2.)It is the case of the petitioners that defendants 3 and 4, namely, Sule and Thakkar, entered into an agreement of sale with the petitioners on 21-1-1973 coupled with a power of attorney etc. and delivered possession of the land to the extent of 12 acres and 12 guntas. As stated earlier, possession was already taken over by the railways. After the award was made, defendants 3 and 4 made an application before the Land Acquisition Officer claiming proportionate compensation for the lands said to have been purchased by them. The Land Acquisition Officer had not accepted it but made a reference to the Civil Court under section 30. In the reference made to the High Court under section 30, the defendants 3 and 4 remained ex parte and an award was made by the High Court declaring that Maibai @ Jamnabai was entitled to the entire compensation. That award also had become final. Though the petitioners subsequently gave up the relief of declaration that the plaintiffs are the successors in title to the lands purchased by Sule and Thakkar in respect of 33 acres and 2 guntas, claimed a declaration that the acquisition of land of 60 acres 38 guntas pursuant to the award dated 13-7-1966 and 26-5-1968 as illegal, null and void and of no effect and injunction.
(3.)It is true that the trial Judge recorded a finding that the appellants were in possession of the land directed them to give possession but ultimately the Single Judge dismissed the suit. On appeal, the Division Bench found that possession was handed over to the railways and the railways had been in possession of the land. Shri Ashok Desai, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, contended that there was a dispute as to the identification of the land. The petitioners' land was not the subject-matter of the acquisition and that, therefore, when the learned trial Judge had found that possession of the land was with petitioners, the Division Bench had committed error in holding that the petitioners were not entitled to declaration or injunction. In view of the finding by the trial Court that the petitioners were in possession, unless they are lawfully dispossessed, no interference with their possession was called for and, therefore, they are entitled to the injunction sought for. We find no substance in the contention.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.