9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Suit barred by limitation - Jurisdiction of the Civil Court under U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951 Analysis: The case involved a dispute over certain Bhumidari plots, initially purchased in the name of Markandey, the uncle of the plaintiffs, and later recorded in the name of his widow, Jagdamba. After Jagdamba's death, the plaintiffs, as reversioners, claimed title to the property, alleging interference by the respondent and seeking a permanent injunction or possession. The trial court held the suit barred by limitation, but the appellate court disagreed, decreeing possession in favor of the plaintiffs. In a second appeal, the High Court remanded the case for specific findings on possession commencement and the minority status of one plaintiff at Jagdamba's death. The High Court determined that the suit, filed when the plaintiff attained majority, was not time-barred under the Limitation Act but dismissed it based on the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act rules, prescribing a two-year limitation from a specific date. The High Court concluded that the Civil Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit, as per the U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951, which mandated such cases to be filed before a Special Court. The Supreme Court upheld the dismissal, emphasizing the Civil Court's lack of jurisdiction due to the specific provisions of the U.P. Act No. 1 of 1951, which barred ordinary civil courts from adjudicating on such matters. Despite the defendant's unsuccessful attempt to establish title, the Court ruled in favor of dismissing the appeal, directing each party to bear their own costs. The judgment highlighted the importance of jurisdictional issues and the need to adhere to specific legal provisions governing different types of disputes, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
|
