Declaration behind injunction
kashif
(Querist) 27 December 2012
This query is : Resolved
According to the current Khatauni of an agricultural land, Mr A is one of the ten owners enlisted ( as owners with transferrable rights ). Mr A brings a civil suite against one of the cosharers praying permanent injunction and submitting court fee accordingly, in his plaint he says that he is the sole owner and submits some documents ( a sale deed etc of 1930 ) in his favour. Thus while acoording to current RoRs he is not the sole owner, he by his plaint indirectly wants relief of declaration from the court. In this case can the respondant bring the point that plaintiff should submit court fee based on consequentional releif of declaration.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 27 December 2012
Need not , in any case he would be bArred by asking for consequential relief in a later suit by Order 2 Rule 2 OF cpc.
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 27 December 2012
court will not grant any relief beyond pleadings.
AAK
(Expert) 02 January 2013
It seems its bare injunction suit.. if that is the case, the court will look only into only the settled possession of plaintiff over the suit property. If the ownership is denied he need to ask separate relief of declaration.
kashif
(Querist) 04 January 2013
AAK Sir,
Plaintiff, through his application has prayed for injunction only. However in his detailed VAAD PATRA tried to show that he is the sole owner, while according to current RoR he is a co-owner. He is thus denying the ownership and possession of other co-owners. The position is such that he shld have brought a declaration suite, but it involves more cost. So he filed bare injunction suite and in that he raised the question of title, making it a consequentional releif, saving cost.
I m confused, I think that when ownership is made disputed (RoR i.e Current Kahatauni is the final document of the ownership of any agricultural land, and if any shareholder has any problem with any entry of the RoR, then there are revenue courts and other mechanisms for him) then how a bare injunction is brought against coowner. In one of my recent querries I got the legal position cleared from lawyersclub experts that every co-owner is the owner of each and every inch of the combined land. So according to section 41(h)specific releif act bare injunction is not maintainable against co-owners as another effective releif named "partition suite" is available. I think that when title is made disputed by plaintiff himself, then bare injunction suite is again barred by sec 41(h) of Sp Releif Act as more effective releif "declaration suite" is available.
Plz clarify my position and guide me what I do in such a case.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 04 January 2013
You are clear in your approach. such suit is hit by section 41 (h) of Specific Relief Act as the land is joint holding of every person to the suit.
