Thursday, 17 August 2017

Whether suit can be permitted to be filed even if there is bar on hearing of said suit?

Section 29 creates a bar "for hearing and deciding a suit" filed by the public Trust for enforcement of any of their rights, if the said Trust is not registered under the Act. The bar, therefore, applies for "hearing and deciding" a suit and not in filing the suit. In other words, suit can be filed by the unregistered Trust but such suit will neither be heard nor decided by the Court unless and until the Trust is registered under the Act. Section 29 is, therefore, operates as stay of proceedings in the suit so long as the Trust does not get itself registered under the Act.

22. A fortiori, the moment the Trust is registered under the Act, the Trial Court would assume the jurisdiction to hear and decide the suit on merits. The bar created Under Section 29 of the Act for "hearing and deciding" the suit is then lifted and ceases to apply to the proceedings in the suit.
N THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 3034 of 2008, Civil Appeal No. 9876 of 2017 

Decided On: 25.07.2017

 Public Trust Shri Geeta Satsang Bhawan
Vs.
Nand Lal and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
R.K. Agrawal and Abhay Manohar Sapre, JJ.

Print Page

Guidelines of Supreme court to prevent misuse of S 498A of IPC

Thus, after careful consideration of the whole issue, we consider it fit to give following directions:

i) (a) In every district one or more Family Welfare Committees be constituted by the District Legal Services Authorities preferably comprising of three members. The constitution and working of such committees may be reviewed from time to time and at least once in a year by the District and Sessions Judge of the district who is also the Chairman of the District Legal Services Authority.

(b) The Committees may be constituted out of para legal volunteers/social workers/retired persons/wives of working officers/other citizens who may be found suitable and willing.

(c) The Committee members will not be called as witnesses.

(d) Every complaint Under Section 498A received by the police or the Magistrate be referred to and looked into by such committee. Such committee may have interaction with the parties personally or by means of telephone or any other mode of communication including electronic communication.

(e) Report of such committee be given to the Authority by whom the complaint is referred to it latest within one month from the date of receipt of complaint.

(f) The committee may give its brief report about the factual aspects and its opinion in the matter.

(g) Till report of the committee is received, no arrest should normally be effected.

(h) The report may be then considered by the Investigating Officer or the Magistrate on its own merit.

(i) Members of the committee may be given such basic minimum training as may be considered necessary by the Legal Services Authority from time to time.

(j) The Members of the committee may be given such honorarium as may be considered viable.

(k) It will be open to the District and Sessions Judge to utilize the cost fund wherever considered necessary and proper.

ii) Complaints Under Section 498A and other connected offences may be investigated only by a designated Investigating Officer of the area. Such designations may be made within one month from today. Such designated officer may be required to undergo training for such duration (not less than one week) as may be considered appropriate. The training may be completed within four months from today;

iii) In cases where a settlement is reached, it will be open to the District and Sessions Judge or any other senior Judicial Officer nominated by him in the district to dispose of the proceedings including closing of the criminal case if dispute primarily relates to matrimonial discord;

iv) If a bail application is fled with at least one clear day's notice to the Public Prosecutor/complainant, the same may be decided as far as possible on the same day. Recovery of disputed dowry items may not by itself be a ground for denial of bail if maintenance or other rights of wife/minor children can otherwise be protected. Needless to say that in dealing with bail matters, individual roles, prima facie truth of the allegations, requirement of further arrest/custody and interest of justice must be carefully weighed;

v) In respect of persons ordinarily residing out of India impounding of passports or issuance of Red Corner Notice should not be a routine;

vi) It will be open to the District Judge or a designated senior judicial officer nominated by the District Judge to club all connected cases between the parties arising out of matrimonial disputes so that a holistic view is taken by the Court to whom all such cases are entrusted; and

vii) Personal appearance of all family members and particularly outstation members may not be required and the trial court ought to grant exemption from personal appearance or permit appearance by video conferencing without adversely affecting progress of the trial.

viii) These directions will not apply to the offences involving tangible physical injuries or death.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 1265 of 2017 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 2013 of 2017)

Decided On: 27.07.2017

 Rajesh Sharma and Ors.
Vs.
State of U.P. and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
A.K. Goel and U.U. Lalit, JJ.


Print Page

Whether landlord can evict tenant even if tenant is not in possession of property of built by him or allotted to him?

The words 'built' and 'allotted' do not mean that after building residence or after allotment of a residence, the tenant must also acquire its possession. If a tenant builds a house and does not occupy it, he is liable to eviction, according to the High Court. Similarly, if a residence is allotted to a tenant, but he does not occupy it and allows others to occupy the same, he is not protected, according to the High Court. The Act provides that building of a house by tenant or allotment of residence to him is a ground of eviction available to the land lord against his tenant. The learned Judge of the High Court was of the view that it is not necessary for a landlord to prove either that the tenant has built and acquired vacant possession of the building or that he has been allotted and taken possession of the allotted premises.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal Nos. 2150-53 of 1982

Decided On: 17.07.1987

Ganpat Ram Sharma and Ors.
Vs.
 Gayatri Devi

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
S. Natarajan and Sabyasachi Mukherjee, JJ.

Citation: AIR 1987 SC 2016
Print Page

Saturday, 29 July 2017

When suit for eviction on ground of subletting will become barred by limitation?

After hearing both the learned Counsel, and after perusal of the Trial Court judgment and the lower Appellate Court judgment, it is clear that in the instant case, though the tenancy was created in favour of Respondent No. 1, the Respondent No. 1 never stayed in the suit premises, right from inception, i.e. 1st February, 1969. On the contrary, the Respondent No. 1 had illegally sub-let the same to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 from 1st February, 1969. If that be so, the breach of tenancy conditions occurred on 1st February, 1969, and the suit ought to have been filed within 12 years, as per Article 66 of the Limitation Act. Ex-facie the suit is barred by law of limitation. 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

Writ Petition No. 684 of 1991

Decided On: 05.12.2006

 Shri Taherbhai Taiyebhai Poonawala, 
Vs.
 Shri G. Hamid Hasan Patel 
Hon'ble Judges: 
Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, J.

Citation: AIR 2007 Bom 80
Print Page