HELP DESK

Himachal Pradesh Judicial Academy

16 Mile, Shimla-Mandi National Highway, Shimla-171014

Important Reading Materials | Video Lectures

Recent Posts

►  

Comments:….. 'X' gifted a piece of land to a deity namely "Bhagwan z" through his  'pujari' in the year 1991.In the year 2014 this land was acquired for making a national highway and now, compensation amount is to be released in favour of deity through  'pujari. Gift is duly mutated in favour of deity. Now the LRs of deceased 'X' have filed a suit seeking declaration that gift was void ab initio firstly  for the reason that it being an ancestral property, father who was karta, could not alienate it and secondally it is hit by provision of section 118 of HPLRT Act as deity does not fall within the definition of agriculturist.  LRs/plaintiffs have also filed an application under O. XXXIX, R. 1&2 CPC with a prayer to restrain the respondents who are 1. Deity through 'pujari; 2. Pujari as manager, from withdrawing  the acqusition amount. No one else is  party. Though this is a liquidated damage and can be compensated in terms of money but question is that how this injury in actual can be compensated in case plaintiff succeeds his case. This 'pujari is the LR of earlier pujari on the basis of some certificate from one Akhara, now there are every chances that if he is allowed to withdraw the amount which is in lacs then he may run away with this or may spent the amount. what should be the appropriate course as per law.whether injunction can be granted ? whether the dictum of judgment in 1998LawSuit (ori) 327 can be applied here in granting injunction? Following are the points which are striking in my mind:

1. The damages are liquidated
2. Apprehension by applicant about spending the money by respondent and
impossibilities of its recoveries from a baba.
3. Authority with whom money is lying is not a party
4. Limitation. whether declaration to a transaction which is void ab
initio is also subject to law of limitation and whether it is
appropriate to see this point at this stage because during trial
plaintiff may also show that the transaction was not in his knowledge or
any other ground justifying delay?

►  

Reply: Once the question of payment of compensation has been determined by the Collector, any question regarding entitlement can be gone into under section 30 and the jurisdiction of the civil court is barred in such a situation.

► Lakshmi Chand Vs Gram Panchayat A.I.R.1996 S.C.523

► Total Ram vs. Dumnu Ram RSA no. 223 of 1999 decided on 21.11.2011

► Arulmighu Lakshminarasimhaswamy Temple Singirugudi vs. Union of India 1996 (6) SCC 408

► Hira Singh vs. Smt.Sohni 1987 C.C.C.26

► Charan Dass vs. State 2008 HLJ 1200

►  

Comments: “…….. a sister has three brothers. She wants to relinquish her share in joint property of all of them, in favour of one brother only. Can she do so ? Or She has to relinquish her share in favour of all the three brothers.”

►  

Reply: Please find enclosed judgment of the Delhi High Court dealing with the issue in Para 14, 20 and 21. Hope that this would help.

See Judgment

Post your comments at: helpdeskja@outlook.com

►  

Note: Kindly configure your Thunderbird Mail Client Application with your email Id so as to enabling you to post comments to the Help Desk of H.P. Judicial Academy, Shimla at helpdeskja@outlook.com. The comments received by the Academy at Help Desk may also be available in this page to share the knowledge. The Sender’s identity will not be disclosed/displayed anywhere in the website of the Academy.The Comments may also be sent directly to helpdeskja@outlook.com. Help Desk Modules are entirely based on Ubuntu-Linux 12.04.01 LTS as recommended by Hon’ble e-Committee, Supreme Court of India.