Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2011 (8) TMI 1378

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tle suit no. 8 of 1997 whereby the plaintiff-respondent's suit for grant of letters of administration over the suit property has been decreed. 2. The plaintiff-respondent filed the aforesaid injunction application stating that the appellant has transferred some of the lands of Sri 108 Ramjanki Ji, Sri Lakshman Ji, Sri Hanuman Lala Ji and Sri Ganesh Ji installed in the temple and is further contemplating to sell the subject matter and in fact, has presented the sale deed for registration and, therefore, the injunction application has been filed with a prayer to restrain the appellant from alienating, transferring, dealing with or in any manner encumbering or interfering with or damaging the suit property till disposal of this appeal. 3. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... kumar Sinha appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that in probate case, no injunction can be granted because there is no dispute between the parties regarding the corporeal right to property in the probate case. The learned counsel relied upon a decision reported in Patna Lower (sic--Law?) Reporter 1998 Patna 21 (Chandrika Pandey vs. Ghanshyam Pandey) and submitted that it cannot be said that any property is involved in the probate case, hence, interim injunction cannot be granted. A counter-affidavit has also been filed agitating the claim made in the probate case and succession case. 5. Admittedly, the appellant filed succession case no. 27 of 1989 claiming inheritance of the suit property on the basis that he was adopted as Krit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the appellant is transferring the land. In a decision reported in A.I.R. 2005 SC 104 (Maharwal Khewaji Trust vs. Baldev Dass), the Hon'ble Apex Court at paragraph 10 has held as follows:-- We do not think in the facts and circumstances of this case, the lower appellate Court and the High Court were justified in permitting the respondent to change the nature of property by putting up construction as also by permitting the alienation of the property, whatever may be the condition on which the same is done. In the event of the appellant's claim being found baseless ultimately, it is always open to the respondent to claim damages, or, in an appropriate case, the Court may itself award damages for the loss suffered, if any, in this rega .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e decision of the Apex Court, in the present situation, the Court has got inherent jurisdiction under Section 151 C.P.C. to protect the rights of the parties. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the decision of the Supreme Court is not applicable because in that case, suit was filed for declaration of title. I do not agree with the learned counsel for the appellant simply because if it is accepted, then there will be another round of litigation between the parties. The Court is not helpless or powerless. As has been held by the Apex Court to meet the situation like this case, the Court has got inherent jurisdiction under Section 151 C.P.C. to protect the property for which the proceedings are pending. Here admittedly, the s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e inherent power of the Court to make orders necessary for the ends of justice. In the face of such a clear statement, it is not possible to hold that the provisions of the Code control the inherent power by limiting it or otherwise affecting it. The inherent power has not been conferred upon the Court; it is a power inherent in the Court by virtue of its duty to do justice between the parties before it. Further, when the Code itself recognizes the existence of the inherent power of the Court, there is no question of implying any powers outside the limits of the Code. Thus, there being no such expression in S. 94 which expressly prohibits the issue of a temporary injunction in circumstances not covered by Order 39 or by any rules made under .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates