2013 (4) TMI 956 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Jurisdiction of Small Causes Court to determine the issue of title.
2. Applicability of Section 14(2) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
3. Res judicata in the context of Small Causes Court findings.
4. Maintainability of application under Order IX Rule 13 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure by a non-party.

Summary:

1. Jurisdiction of Small Causes Court to determine the issue of title:
The appellants contended that the Small Causes Court lacked the jurisdiction to determine the issue of title over the property, as such an issue should be adjudicated by a Civil Court. The court held that the Small Causes Court cannot adjudicate upon the issue of title, as per Section 23 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887. The court emphasized that the Small Causes Court only determines the relationship of landlord and tenant, not the title.

2. Applicability of Section 14(2) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956:
The appellants argued that the judgment and order dated 23.4.1958 could not be given effect in view of Section 14(2) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The court referred to its previous decisions and held that if a Hindu female has been given only a "life interest" through a Will or gift, the said rights would not crystallize into absolute ownership under Section 14(1) of the Act. Section 14(2) carves out an exception, maintaining the life interest even after the commencement of the Act.

3. Res judicata in the context of Small Causes Court findings:
The court noted that for res judicata to apply, the finding must dispose of a matter directly and substantially in issue in the former suit. A question regarding title in a small cause suit is incidental to the substantial issue in the suit. Therefore, a finding on title by a Small Causes Court does not operate as res judicata in subsequent regular suits for determining or enforcing any right or interest in the immovable property.

4. Maintainability of application under Order IX Rule 13 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure by a non-party:
The court held that an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC cannot be filed by a person who was not initially a party to the proceedings. Inherent powers under Section 151 CPC can be exercised only where no remedy is provided under the CPC. If an order is obtained by fraud upon the court, the court can recall it on the application of the aggrieved person. However, if fraud is committed upon a party, the court cannot investigate it under Section 151 CPC, and the aggrieved party must file an independent suit.

Conclusion:
The appeals were allowed, and the impugned judgment and order were set aside. The respondents were given liberty to seek appropriate remedy through permissible legal proceedings.