1966 (4) TMI 75 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
- Suit for partition and separate possession
- Claim for compensation
- Application of Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947
- Enforceability of contract for compensation
- Non-joinder of a co-owner as a party to the suit

Analysis:
The Supreme Court heard an appeal from a judgment of the Patna High Court regarding a suit for partition and separate possession of a property, along with a claim for compensation. The property was jointly purchased by two joint Hindu families, each having a half interest. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants agreed to pay compensation but failed to do so. The defendants raised defenses including the applicability of the Bihar Buildings Control Act and the enforceability of the compensation contract. The trial court held against the plaintiffs, citing the Act and non-joinder of a party. The High Court disagreed, ruling that the Act did not apply, adoption was not disproved, and non-joinder was not fatal to the suit. The High Court found the compensation contract valid and enforceable, limiting arrears to three years. It granted partition and compensation, allowing interest and costs.

The main issues revolved around the maintainability of the suit for partition and separate possession, and the enforceability of the compensation contract. The trial court had ruled against the plaintiffs, citing the Bihar Buildings Control Act and non-joinder of a co-owner. However, the High Court disagreed, finding the Act inapplicable and non-joinder not fatal. It upheld the validity of the compensation contract, limiting arrears to three years. The High Court granted partition, compensation, interest on arrears, and costs. The plaintiffs sought further relief for compensation from the date of the suit until recovery of possession, which the High Court granted, specifying the entitlement to compensation until partition or three years from its decree.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, ruling in favor of the plaintiffs regarding the partition, compensation, and other relief sought. The High Court's findings on the applicability of the Act, non-joinder, and the enforceability of the compensation contract were affirmed. The Court provided detailed reasoning on each issue, ensuring that the rights of the parties were adequately addressed and enforced.