RAJESHWAR DAYAL Vs. AVNEESH KUMAR AVASTHI
LAWS(SC)-2002-4-10
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: ALLAHABAD)
Decided on
April 04,2002
RAJESHWAR DAYAL
Appellant
VERSUS
AVNEESH KUMAR AVASTHI
Respondents
Cited Judgements :-
DR. PYARE LAL MISHRA VS. SRI BARE MAHADEVJI MAHRAJ [LAWS(ALL)-2009-10-266] [REFERRED TO]JUDGEMENT
D. P. Mohapatra, J. -
(1.)Leave granted.
(2.)These appeals filed by heirs and legal representatives of the erstwhile lessee are directed against the judgment dated 9-9-1999 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dismissing the second appeal Nos. 425/1960 and 1649/1962. The dispute raised in both the appeals relates to the property under old plot No. 5199 which corresponds to new plot No. 4635-A with an area of 1 bigha 2 biswas situate in the city of Meerut which forms a part of the estate of a charitable trust, the Lala Nanak Chand Trust, Bateshwar Dayal was one of the trustees of the said trust. A registered lease deed was executed by the trust in his favour for a period of 30 years w.e.f. 1-6-1926 on annual rental of Rupees 12 and 8 annas. After expiry of the period of lease on 1-7-1956 the trust instituted the suit, Original Suit No. 690 of 1956, against Bateswar Dayal and others seeking recovery of possession of the property. The trial Court dismissed the suit. The trust filed an appeal, Civil Appeal No. 914 of 1958, which was allowed and the suit for eviction was decreed. The lower appellate Court while decreeing the suit observed that if the defendants so like they may file a suit for specific performance of contract to enforce the renewal clause of the registered agreement between the trust and the defendants. Taking clue from the observation of the lower appellate Court the appellants who are the heirs and legal representatives of Bateshwar Dayal who died on 6-3-1958, instituted a suit, O. S. No. 34/60 for specific performance of contract. The trust contested the suit. The trial Court dismissed the suit vide the judgment dated 30-10-1961. The appeal filed by the plaintiff was also dismissed.
(3.)Two second appeals were filed in the High Court challenging the judgments of the first appellate Courts in the two suits. Second Appeal No.425/60 arose from Original Suit No. 690/56; the second appeal No.1649/62 arose out of original suit No. 34/60. In second appeal No. 425/60 the High Court formulated the following substantial questions of law for decision :
"1. If the Civil Court has jurisdiction to try the suit.
2. If the plaintiffs got a decree for eviction in view of renewable clause in the agreement -
(2.)These appeals filed by heirs and legal representatives of the erstwhile lessee are directed against the judgment dated 9-9-1999 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dismissing the second appeal Nos. 425/1960 and 1649/1962. The dispute raised in both the appeals relates to the property under old plot No. 5199 which corresponds to new plot No. 4635-A with an area of 1 bigha 2 biswas situate in the city of Meerut which forms a part of the estate of a charitable trust, the Lala Nanak Chand Trust, Bateshwar Dayal was one of the trustees of the said trust. A registered lease deed was executed by the trust in his favour for a period of 30 years w.e.f. 1-6-1926 on annual rental of Rupees 12 and 8 annas. After expiry of the period of lease on 1-7-1956 the trust instituted the suit, Original Suit No. 690 of 1956, against Bateswar Dayal and others seeking recovery of possession of the property. The trial Court dismissed the suit. The trust filed an appeal, Civil Appeal No. 914 of 1958, which was allowed and the suit for eviction was decreed. The lower appellate Court while decreeing the suit observed that if the defendants so like they may file a suit for specific performance of contract to enforce the renewal clause of the registered agreement between the trust and the defendants. Taking clue from the observation of the lower appellate Court the appellants who are the heirs and legal representatives of Bateshwar Dayal who died on 6-3-1958, instituted a suit, O. S. No. 34/60 for specific performance of contract. The trust contested the suit. The trial Court dismissed the suit vide the judgment dated 30-10-1961. The appeal filed by the plaintiff was also dismissed.
(3.)Two second appeals were filed in the High Court challenging the judgments of the first appellate Courts in the two suits. Second Appeal No.425/60 arose from Original Suit No. 690/56; the second appeal No.1649/62 arose out of original suit No. 34/60. In second appeal No. 425/60 the High Court formulated the following substantial questions of law for decision :
"1. If the Civil Court has jurisdiction to try the suit.
2. If the plaintiffs got a decree for eviction in view of renewable clause in the agreement -
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.