Skip to content


Ram Gopal Vs. Smt. Sarubai and Others - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1981)4SCC505; 1981(13)LC434a(SC)
AppellantRam Gopal
RespondentSmt. Sarubai and Others
Excerpt:
.....- judgment modified to extent that applicant's application for ejectment allowed to extent of 6 acres of disputed land. - sections 18, 20, 42 & 50: [s.b. sinha, dr. mukundakam sharma, h.l. dattu, jj] contraband search - recovery of contraband - high court found that no independent witness was examined - ladies were personally searched by the male officers in violation of sub-section (4) of section 50 of the act - there were several infirmities in the prosecution case - prosecution did not examine any independent witness -why independent witnesses could not be found was not been explained - no explanation has been furnished as to why the first information report was lodged after 11 hours and why the mandatory provisions of subsection (2) of section 42 of the act had not been..........and is not available to him and there is no other source of sustenance to the appellant except the land in dispute. in view of the pressing circumstances and also having regard to the fact that the case has been pending in the court for the last 20 years mr. naunit lal has fairly conceded at the instance of the court that any order which the court may think reasonable may be passed to do justice to the parties. in view of these circumstance we modify the order and the judgment under appeal to this extent that the applicant's application for ejectment is allowed to the extent of 6 acres out of the land in dispute of survey no. 13. the allotment of 6 acres out of the total area of the land in dispute shall be made by the tehsildar taking into consideration the nature and character of the.....
Judgment:

S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, J.

1. After hearing counsel for the parties and having gone through the judgments of the courts below, we are satisfied that this is a matter which is pre-eminently fit for settlement. The judgment under appeal against the appellant undoubtedly causes serious hardship to the appellant inasmuch as the land which he had possessed has already been sold of and is not available to him and there is no other source of sustenance to the appellant except the land in dispute. In view of the pressing circumstances and also having regard to the fact that the case has been pending in the court for the last 20 years Mr. Naunit Lal has fairly conceded at the instance of the court that any order which the court may think reasonable may be passed to do justice to the parties. In view of these circumstance we modify the order and the judgment under appeal to this extent that the applicant's application for ejectment is allowed to the extent of 6 acres out of the land in dispute of survey No. 13. The allotment of 6 acres out of the total area of the land in dispute shall be made by the Tehsildar taking into consideration the nature and character of the soil. The appeal is accordingly disposed of without any order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //