1. A preliminary decree in a partition suit only decides the rights and shares of the parties. Equities are adjusted in the final decree after considering a tentative partition scheme.
2. For agricultural lands assessed to revenue, the civil court only declares parties' shares and the authority concerned effects the actual partition by boundaries.
3. Where a preliminary decree relates to agricultural land, the court directs partition to be made by the Collector according to the rights declared and provisions of Section 54 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The document discusses the appointment of receivers in India. It notes that receivers can be appointed by a court before or after a decree to act as custodians of property during legal proceedings. Receivers essentially take on the role of property owners and have powers to manage, protect, and improve the property. They must submit accounts to the court, pay amounts owed, and are responsible for any losses due to willful misconduct or negligence. The court can enforce receivers' duties and hold them accountable by attaching their property if needed. Collectors may also be appointed as receivers for certain land revenue properties with the collector's consent.
The document discusses key concepts and terminology related to civil procedure in India according to the Civil Procedure Code of 1908. It defines important legal terms like cause of action, judgement, decree, jurisdiction, res judicata, and discovery. It also outlines the various stages of civil proceedings, including institution of a suit, appearance of parties, remedies, and discovery processes.
Cpc learning module 4 appearance, examination and trialDr. Vikas Khakare
This document provides an overview of various topics related to the Code of Civil Procedure in India, including appearance and examination of parties, adjournments, commissions, arrest before judgment, attachment before judgment, temporary injunction, appointment of receivers, interest, and costs. It discusses the relevant sections and orders of the Code and provides details on the procedures and grounds for each topic. The document is presented as teaching materials on the Code of Civil Procedure for law students.
This document discusses temporary injunctions under Indian law. It defines a temporary injunction as continuing until a specified time or further court order, and that they can be granted at any stage of a suit. The primary purpose is to maintain the status quo until the final determination of the suit. It lists 12 cases where a temporary injunction may be granted, such as when property is in danger or being wasted. It outlines the principles a court considers, including whether the plaintiff has a prima facie case, the balance of convenience favors the plaintiff, and the plaintiff would suffer irreparable injury without injunction. It defines these terms and notes injunction is an equitable remedy where the party must do equity and not suppress material facts.
This document discusses several cases related to the strict construction of penal statutes and criminal law. It provides guidelines for determining whether an offense requires mens rea or creates strict liability. Specifically, it establishes that statutes creating criminal offenses must be interpreted as requiring proof of mens rea or criminal intent unless Parliament clearly intended to create a strict liability offense. The document also summarizes several cases where courts interpreted ambiguous language in penal statutes in favor of defendants.
This document discusses the concept and object of limitation under Indian law. It defines limitation as a prescribed time limit for legal actions according to statute. The main objects of limitation are to prevent long dormant claims, protect defendants who may have lost evidence, and encourage prompt filing of claims. Limitation periods are intended to limit controversies to a fixed time period. The Limitation Act 1963 in India contains provisions for limitation periods for suits, appeals, and other applications. Court decisions have found that the object of limitation is to prevent disturbance of long enjoyment and to discourage stale claims. Important limitation periods outlined include 6 years for contracts and torts, and 12 years for contracts under seal or recovery of land.
Code of civil procedure 1908 reference, review, revisionDr. Vikas Khakare
This explains what is reference, review and revision. when and where it can be made. It also explains difference between reference, review and revision.
Code of civil procedure 1908 miscellaneous, interest,cost, exemption from app...Dr. Vikas Khakare
This contains miscellaneous provision like interest in suit, cost of suit, persons exempted for appearing in the court, caveat and inherent powers of court.
The document discusses the appointment of receivers in India. It notes that receivers can be appointed by a court before or after a decree to act as custodians of property during legal proceedings. Receivers essentially take on the role of property owners and have powers to manage, protect, and improve the property. They must submit accounts to the court, pay amounts owed, and are responsible for any losses due to willful misconduct or negligence. The court can enforce receivers' duties and hold them accountable by attaching their property if needed. Collectors may also be appointed as receivers for certain land revenue properties with the collector's consent.
The document discusses key concepts and terminology related to civil procedure in India according to the Civil Procedure Code of 1908. It defines important legal terms like cause of action, judgement, decree, jurisdiction, res judicata, and discovery. It also outlines the various stages of civil proceedings, including institution of a suit, appearance of parties, remedies, and discovery processes.
Cpc learning module 4 appearance, examination and trialDr. Vikas Khakare
This document provides an overview of various topics related to the Code of Civil Procedure in India, including appearance and examination of parties, adjournments, commissions, arrest before judgment, attachment before judgment, temporary injunction, appointment of receivers, interest, and costs. It discusses the relevant sections and orders of the Code and provides details on the procedures and grounds for each topic. The document is presented as teaching materials on the Code of Civil Procedure for law students.
This document discusses temporary injunctions under Indian law. It defines a temporary injunction as continuing until a specified time or further court order, and that they can be granted at any stage of a suit. The primary purpose is to maintain the status quo until the final determination of the suit. It lists 12 cases where a temporary injunction may be granted, such as when property is in danger or being wasted. It outlines the principles a court considers, including whether the plaintiff has a prima facie case, the balance of convenience favors the plaintiff, and the plaintiff would suffer irreparable injury without injunction. It defines these terms and notes injunction is an equitable remedy where the party must do equity and not suppress material facts.
This document discusses several cases related to the strict construction of penal statutes and criminal law. It provides guidelines for determining whether an offense requires mens rea or creates strict liability. Specifically, it establishes that statutes creating criminal offenses must be interpreted as requiring proof of mens rea or criminal intent unless Parliament clearly intended to create a strict liability offense. The document also summarizes several cases where courts interpreted ambiguous language in penal statutes in favor of defendants.
This document discusses the concept and object of limitation under Indian law. It defines limitation as a prescribed time limit for legal actions according to statute. The main objects of limitation are to prevent long dormant claims, protect defendants who may have lost evidence, and encourage prompt filing of claims. Limitation periods are intended to limit controversies to a fixed time period. The Limitation Act 1963 in India contains provisions for limitation periods for suits, appeals, and other applications. Court decisions have found that the object of limitation is to prevent disturbance of long enjoyment and to discourage stale claims. Important limitation periods outlined include 6 years for contracts and torts, and 12 years for contracts under seal or recovery of land.
Code of civil procedure 1908 reference, review, revisionDr. Vikas Khakare
This explains what is reference, review and revision. when and where it can be made. It also explains difference between reference, review and revision.
Code of civil procedure 1908 miscellaneous, interest,cost, exemption from app...Dr. Vikas Khakare
This contains miscellaneous provision like interest in suit, cost of suit, persons exempted for appearing in the court, caveat and inherent powers of court.
Domicile of special categories and dependents in Private international lawcarolineelias239
Being a dependent, one cannot acquire his own domicile of choice in private international law. And the situations of persons like fugitives & refugees are different from other individuals. This slide particularly talks about domicile status of dependents, fugitives, refugees, etc.
The document provides an overview of key definitions and concepts from the Code of Civil Procedure in India across 5 units.
Unit I defines key terms like decree, suit of civil nature, and jurisdiction of courts. It notes a decree can be preliminary, final, or partly preliminary and partly final. A preliminary decree requires further steps, while a final decree completely resolves a suit.
The document outlines the structure of the Code of Civil Procedure and provides definitions of important terms from Section 2 like plaintiff, defendant, suit, and decree. It distinguishes decrees from orders.
This document discusses parties to a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 in India. It defines plaintiff and defendant, and discusses rules around joinder, nonjoinder, and misjoinder of parties. It explains that a plaintiff is the person filing a suit to enforce a legal right, while a defendant is the person being sued. Multiple plaintiffs and defendants can be joined in one suit if there is a common issue. One person may also represent a group in a representative suit under certain conditions, such as numerous parties sharing a common interest.
CONTEMPORNEA EXPOSITIO EXTERNAL AID TO INTERPRETATIONShreya Chaurasia
Interpretation means the art of finding out the true sense of an enactment by giving the words of the enactment their natural and ordinary meaning.
It is the process of ascertaining the true meaning of the words used in a statute.
The Court is not expected to interpret arbitrarily and therefore there have been certain principles which have evolved out of the continuous exercise by the Courts. These principles are sometimes called ‘rules of interpretation’.
The object of interpretation of statutes is to determine the intention of the legislature conveyed expressly or impliedly in the language used.
Contempornea Expositio means that the meaning of words in a document are to be understood in the sense which they bore at the time of the document.
Contemporaneous exposition is the best and strongest in law. It is said that the best exposition of a statute or any other document is that which it has received from contemporary authority.
Contemporanea expositio est optima means usage or practice developed under a statute is indicative of the meaning ascribed to its words by contemporary opinion.
External Aid includes Historical Background,The original bill drafted and introduced,Legal Dictionaries,Debates in the Legislature,Judicial Construction etc.
This document discusses the concept of "cognizance" under criminal law in India. It begins by defining cognizance as a court or magistrate gaining knowledge or awareness of the alleged commission of an offense in order to initiate legal proceedings. It notes that cognizance is taken of offenses, not offenders. The document then outlines how cognizance can be taken based on a complaint, police report, or own knowledge. It discusses important points regarding when cognizance is taken, the offenses involved, and limitations. Overall, the document provides a comprehensive overview of the concept of cognizance under the Code of Criminal Procedure.
1) Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code allows individuals to apply for anticipatory bail if they believe they may be arrested for a non-bailable offense.
2) The High Court or Court of Session has jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail and may impose conditions to ensure justice and prevent obstruction.
3) Courts have wide discretion in deciding anticipatory bail applications on a case by case basis due to the impossibility of laying down rules for all possible cases.
Legitimacy, Legitimation and Adoption under Private International Lawcarolineelias239
For matters concerning children, and their succeeding rights over parental property is being questioned on the basis of legitimacy or illegitimacy. Legitimation is allowed to convert the status of illegitimacy ti legitimate. Adoption also assures the welfare of the children.
This document provides an overview of the concept of domicile in private international law. It begins with defining domicile, noting that it is difficult to define precisely. It examines the English conception of domicile requiring both residence and intention of permanent residence. It discusses how domicile is ascertained, focusing on problems with determining a person's intention. It also explores the relationship between domicile and nationality, how different legal systems have adopted different connecting factors. The document concludes by examining rules and kinds of domicile.
The document outlines rules for framing lawsuits and joining multiple causes of action in civil suits under the Code of Civil Procedure. It states that every suit should aim to provide a final decision on all matters in dispute. It also lays out that a plaintiff must include their whole claim regarding a cause of action in one suit, and cannot later sue regarding any parts omitted. The rules allow joining multiple causes of action against the same defendant, with jurisdiction based on the total subject matter. Objections to misjoinder must be raised at the earliest opportunity.
Know the difference between Judgement and decree as per CPC.
Helpful for students and law professionals.
You can also visit my YouTube channel: CS Bhuwan Taragi –The law talks
You can connect me on:
Telegram: https://t.me/TheLawTalks
Facebook Page: The Law Talks
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/csBhuwanTaragi
Instagram: the_law_talks
Podcast: https://anchor.fm/thelawtalks
You can watch these Company law topics as well:
Audit committee: https://youtu.be/3oRgCc5uZ-4
Related party transaction: https://youtu.be/p7pf8iW-gTk
Sweat equity shares: https://youtu.be/7vY59DdlPrE
Types of Directors: https://youtu.be/COWYEcZ-0Qo
Loan to Directors: https://youtu.be/oAcOSQJwNgY
Holding and subsidiary definition: https://youtu.be/_ttqn39IjNE
Director Identification no. : https://youtu.be/AGty3SqbOMM
Difference between MOA & AOA: https://youtu.be/TmnRc2TRxTw
Annual General Meeting: https://youtu.be/0Jxtegi2IGg
Requirement of MGT-14: https://youtu.be/6kYdXpbDABM
#CPC #llb #lawclass #reference #review #revision #civilprocedurecode #section113 #lawtopic #legalupdate #lawcollage #rajasthanuniversity #ccs #mdu #du #lawfaculty #clatexams #lawentenrance #legalknowledge #legal #lawupdate #llbexams #ll.bexams #lawexamination #llb3year #lawrevision #short #advocate #lawyer #lawpractise #courtprocedure #ICSI #CS #CA #ICAI #ICWAI #CMA #LAW #Companysecretary
The document summarizes the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 which establishes the laws relating to civil procedure in courts in India. Some key points:
- It consolidates and amends existing laws on civil procedure in Courts of Civil Judicature in India.
- It is divided into 11 Parts covering preliminary matters, suits in general, execution of decrees, incidental proceedings, suits in particular cases, special proceedings, supplemental proceedings, appeals, references and revisions.
- It defines important terms, establishes the subordination of courts, and provides for the jurisdiction and pecuniary limits of courts. It also contains savings for existing special laws and excludes some provisions for small cause courts.
Classification of cause of action / characterisationcarolineelias239
it is the second element in private international law to decide a case having foreign element, after assuming jurisdiction by a court. It is essential to categorize facts of a case & to find out which part of law to be applied - whether tort / contract/ succession/ marital issues etc. Then only a case can be decided.
The document provides an overview of the key stages of a civil suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in India. It discusses the following main stages:
1) Institution of a suit through filing of a plaint.
2) Issuance and service of summons to the defendant.
3) Filing of a written statement by the defendant.
4) Framing of issues by the court based on the plaint and written statement.
5) Trial through examination of witnesses and presentation of evidence by both parties.
6) Arguments from both sides.
7) Pronouncement of judgment by the court.
8) Drawing up of a decree based
Ouster clauses and jurisdiction of civil courtsAnuja Aiyappan
The aim of the ppt is to understand what ouster clauses and jurisdiction of civil courts implies with respect to the Code of Civil Procedure applicable in and to do a study of the different provisions under the corresponding statutes.
LLB LAW NOTES ON PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
FREE AFFIDAVITS AND NOTICES FORMATS
FREE AGREEMENTS AND CONTRACTS FORMATS
FREE LLB LAW NOTES
FREE CA ICWA NOTES
FREE LLB LAW FIRST SEM NOTES
FREE LLB LAW SECOND SEM NOTES
FREE LLB LAW THIRD SEM NOTES
FREE LLB LAW FOURTH SEM NOTES
FREE LLB LAW FIFTH SEM NOTES
FREE LLB LAW SIXTH SEM NOTES
FREE CA ICWA FOUNDATION NOTES
FREE CA ICWA INTERMEDIATE NOTES
FREE CA ICWA FINAL NOTES
KANOON KE RAKHWALE INDIA
HIRE LAWYER ONLINE
LAW FIRMS IN DELHI
CA FIRM DELHI
VISIT : https://www.kanoonkerakhwale.com/
VISIT : https://hirelawyeronline.com/
The document discusses the history and provisions of limitation acts in India. It traces the evolution of limitation laws from Roman laws introduced under British rule to the current Limitation Act of 1963. The key objectives of limitation acts are to fix a time limit for filing legal claims and to avoid indefinite uncertainty regarding legal rights and liabilities. The Limitation Act of 1963 consolidated and standardized limitation periods for different types of legal suits, appeals and applications.
This document discusses parties to a suit under Order I of the Code of Civil Procedure. It defines plaintiffs and defendants as the two parties to a suit. There can be multiple plaintiffs or defendants, requiring questions around the joinder of parties. A party may be a necessary party, without whom no order can be made, or a proper party whose presence is not mandatory but allows for complete resolution of the case. The rules around joinder of plaintiffs under Order I Rule 1 and defendants under Order I Rule 3 are described, including when multiple parties can be joined in a suit. The differences between necessary and proper parties are also outlined.
The document summarizes Ireland's arbitration law and practices. Key points include:
- Ireland's Arbitration Act of 2010 is based on the 2006 UNCITRAL Model Law, adopting its provisions virtually unchanged with some minor additions.
- Arbitration is widely used in Ireland, especially in construction, professional partnerships, joint ventures, consumer contracts, and amateur sports.
- While Ireland lacks a major domestic arbitration institution, international bodies like the ICC are commonly used, as well as ad hoc arbitrations with appointing authorities like the Law Society President.
Domicile of special categories and dependents in Private international lawcarolineelias239
Being a dependent, one cannot acquire his own domicile of choice in private international law. And the situations of persons like fugitives & refugees are different from other individuals. This slide particularly talks about domicile status of dependents, fugitives, refugees, etc.
The document provides an overview of key definitions and concepts from the Code of Civil Procedure in India across 5 units.
Unit I defines key terms like decree, suit of civil nature, and jurisdiction of courts. It notes a decree can be preliminary, final, or partly preliminary and partly final. A preliminary decree requires further steps, while a final decree completely resolves a suit.
The document outlines the structure of the Code of Civil Procedure and provides definitions of important terms from Section 2 like plaintiff, defendant, suit, and decree. It distinguishes decrees from orders.
This document discusses parties to a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 in India. It defines plaintiff and defendant, and discusses rules around joinder, nonjoinder, and misjoinder of parties. It explains that a plaintiff is the person filing a suit to enforce a legal right, while a defendant is the person being sued. Multiple plaintiffs and defendants can be joined in one suit if there is a common issue. One person may also represent a group in a representative suit under certain conditions, such as numerous parties sharing a common interest.
CONTEMPORNEA EXPOSITIO EXTERNAL AID TO INTERPRETATIONShreya Chaurasia
Interpretation means the art of finding out the true sense of an enactment by giving the words of the enactment their natural and ordinary meaning.
It is the process of ascertaining the true meaning of the words used in a statute.
The Court is not expected to interpret arbitrarily and therefore there have been certain principles which have evolved out of the continuous exercise by the Courts. These principles are sometimes called ‘rules of interpretation’.
The object of interpretation of statutes is to determine the intention of the legislature conveyed expressly or impliedly in the language used.
Contempornea Expositio means that the meaning of words in a document are to be understood in the sense which they bore at the time of the document.
Contemporaneous exposition is the best and strongest in law. It is said that the best exposition of a statute or any other document is that which it has received from contemporary authority.
Contemporanea expositio est optima means usage or practice developed under a statute is indicative of the meaning ascribed to its words by contemporary opinion.
External Aid includes Historical Background,The original bill drafted and introduced,Legal Dictionaries,Debates in the Legislature,Judicial Construction etc.
This document discusses the concept of "cognizance" under criminal law in India. It begins by defining cognizance as a court or magistrate gaining knowledge or awareness of the alleged commission of an offense in order to initiate legal proceedings. It notes that cognizance is taken of offenses, not offenders. The document then outlines how cognizance can be taken based on a complaint, police report, or own knowledge. It discusses important points regarding when cognizance is taken, the offenses involved, and limitations. Overall, the document provides a comprehensive overview of the concept of cognizance under the Code of Criminal Procedure.
1) Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code allows individuals to apply for anticipatory bail if they believe they may be arrested for a non-bailable offense.
2) The High Court or Court of Session has jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail and may impose conditions to ensure justice and prevent obstruction.
3) Courts have wide discretion in deciding anticipatory bail applications on a case by case basis due to the impossibility of laying down rules for all possible cases.
Legitimacy, Legitimation and Adoption under Private International Lawcarolineelias239
For matters concerning children, and their succeeding rights over parental property is being questioned on the basis of legitimacy or illegitimacy. Legitimation is allowed to convert the status of illegitimacy ti legitimate. Adoption also assures the welfare of the children.
This document provides an overview of the concept of domicile in private international law. It begins with defining domicile, noting that it is difficult to define precisely. It examines the English conception of domicile requiring both residence and intention of permanent residence. It discusses how domicile is ascertained, focusing on problems with determining a person's intention. It also explores the relationship between domicile and nationality, how different legal systems have adopted different connecting factors. The document concludes by examining rules and kinds of domicile.
The document outlines rules for framing lawsuits and joining multiple causes of action in civil suits under the Code of Civil Procedure. It states that every suit should aim to provide a final decision on all matters in dispute. It also lays out that a plaintiff must include their whole claim regarding a cause of action in one suit, and cannot later sue regarding any parts omitted. The rules allow joining multiple causes of action against the same defendant, with jurisdiction based on the total subject matter. Objections to misjoinder must be raised at the earliest opportunity.
Know the difference between Judgement and decree as per CPC.
Helpful for students and law professionals.
You can also visit my YouTube channel: CS Bhuwan Taragi –The law talks
You can connect me on:
Telegram: https://t.me/TheLawTalks
Facebook Page: The Law Talks
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/csBhuwanTaragi
Instagram: the_law_talks
Podcast: https://anchor.fm/thelawtalks
You can watch these Company law topics as well:
Audit committee: https://youtu.be/3oRgCc5uZ-4
Related party transaction: https://youtu.be/p7pf8iW-gTk
Sweat equity shares: https://youtu.be/7vY59DdlPrE
Types of Directors: https://youtu.be/COWYEcZ-0Qo
Loan to Directors: https://youtu.be/oAcOSQJwNgY
Holding and subsidiary definition: https://youtu.be/_ttqn39IjNE
Director Identification no. : https://youtu.be/AGty3SqbOMM
Difference between MOA & AOA: https://youtu.be/TmnRc2TRxTw
Annual General Meeting: https://youtu.be/0Jxtegi2IGg
Requirement of MGT-14: https://youtu.be/6kYdXpbDABM
#CPC #llb #lawclass #reference #review #revision #civilprocedurecode #section113 #lawtopic #legalupdate #lawcollage #rajasthanuniversity #ccs #mdu #du #lawfaculty #clatexams #lawentenrance #legalknowledge #legal #lawupdate #llbexams #ll.bexams #lawexamination #llb3year #lawrevision #short #advocate #lawyer #lawpractise #courtprocedure #ICSI #CS #CA #ICAI #ICWAI #CMA #LAW #Companysecretary
The document summarizes the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 which establishes the laws relating to civil procedure in courts in India. Some key points:
- It consolidates and amends existing laws on civil procedure in Courts of Civil Judicature in India.
- It is divided into 11 Parts covering preliminary matters, suits in general, execution of decrees, incidental proceedings, suits in particular cases, special proceedings, supplemental proceedings, appeals, references and revisions.
- It defines important terms, establishes the subordination of courts, and provides for the jurisdiction and pecuniary limits of courts. It also contains savings for existing special laws and excludes some provisions for small cause courts.
Classification of cause of action / characterisationcarolineelias239
it is the second element in private international law to decide a case having foreign element, after assuming jurisdiction by a court. It is essential to categorize facts of a case & to find out which part of law to be applied - whether tort / contract/ succession/ marital issues etc. Then only a case can be decided.
The document provides an overview of the key stages of a civil suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in India. It discusses the following main stages:
1) Institution of a suit through filing of a plaint.
2) Issuance and service of summons to the defendant.
3) Filing of a written statement by the defendant.
4) Framing of issues by the court based on the plaint and written statement.
5) Trial through examination of witnesses and presentation of evidence by both parties.
6) Arguments from both sides.
7) Pronouncement of judgment by the court.
8) Drawing up of a decree based
Ouster clauses and jurisdiction of civil courtsAnuja Aiyappan
The aim of the ppt is to understand what ouster clauses and jurisdiction of civil courts implies with respect to the Code of Civil Procedure applicable in and to do a study of the different provisions under the corresponding statutes.
LLB LAW NOTES ON PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
FREE AFFIDAVITS AND NOTICES FORMATS
FREE AGREEMENTS AND CONTRACTS FORMATS
FREE LLB LAW NOTES
FREE CA ICWA NOTES
FREE LLB LAW FIRST SEM NOTES
FREE LLB LAW SECOND SEM NOTES
FREE LLB LAW THIRD SEM NOTES
FREE LLB LAW FOURTH SEM NOTES
FREE LLB LAW FIFTH SEM NOTES
FREE LLB LAW SIXTH SEM NOTES
FREE CA ICWA FOUNDATION NOTES
FREE CA ICWA INTERMEDIATE NOTES
FREE CA ICWA FINAL NOTES
KANOON KE RAKHWALE INDIA
HIRE LAWYER ONLINE
LAW FIRMS IN DELHI
CA FIRM DELHI
VISIT : https://www.kanoonkerakhwale.com/
VISIT : https://hirelawyeronline.com/
The document discusses the history and provisions of limitation acts in India. It traces the evolution of limitation laws from Roman laws introduced under British rule to the current Limitation Act of 1963. The key objectives of limitation acts are to fix a time limit for filing legal claims and to avoid indefinite uncertainty regarding legal rights and liabilities. The Limitation Act of 1963 consolidated and standardized limitation periods for different types of legal suits, appeals and applications.
This document discusses parties to a suit under Order I of the Code of Civil Procedure. It defines plaintiffs and defendants as the two parties to a suit. There can be multiple plaintiffs or defendants, requiring questions around the joinder of parties. A party may be a necessary party, without whom no order can be made, or a proper party whose presence is not mandatory but allows for complete resolution of the case. The rules around joinder of plaintiffs under Order I Rule 1 and defendants under Order I Rule 3 are described, including when multiple parties can be joined in a suit. The differences between necessary and proper parties are also outlined.
The document summarizes Ireland's arbitration law and practices. Key points include:
- Ireland's Arbitration Act of 2010 is based on the 2006 UNCITRAL Model Law, adopting its provisions virtually unchanged with some minor additions.
- Arbitration is widely used in Ireland, especially in construction, professional partnerships, joint ventures, consumer contracts, and amateur sports.
- While Ireland lacks a major domestic arbitration institution, international bodies like the ICC are commonly used, as well as ad hoc arbitrations with appointing authorities like the Law Society President.
This document provides the text of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act No. 5 of 1908) of India. Some key points:
- It consolidates and amends the laws relating to civil court procedure in India.
- It is divided into XI Parts covering preliminary matters, suits in general, execution, appeals and references.
- It defines important terms like "decree", "judgment", "pleader" and "public officer".
- It establishes the hierarchy of civil courts in India and that district courts are subordinate to high courts.
- It contains general provisions on court jurisdiction, cases of res judicata and stay of suits.
This document provides the definitions and preliminary information for the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in Bangladesh. It defines key terms used in the code such as "decree", "judgment", "pleader", and "public officer". It also outlines some general principles for Bangladeshi civil procedure such as which courts have jurisdiction over which types of suits, the concept of res judicata, and where suits should be instituted based on the location of the subject matter in dispute.
The document discusses the procedure for enforcing foreign arbitration awards in Indian courts. It notes that foreign awards must first be recognized by an Indian court as a foreign decree before they can be enforced. The court examines the award to ensure it is valid and not against public policy. Once recognized, the foreign award has the same status as an Indian court decree and can be enforced through the lengthy and complex execution procedures under the Code of Civil Procedure. The document argues that streamlining the execution process could help reduce delays and better achieve arbitration's goal of efficient dispute resolution.
This document contains the Civil Procedure Code of 1908 which establishes the rules and procedures for civil litigation in India. Some key points:
- The Code applies to the whole of India except Jammu and Kashmir, Nagaland, and certain tribal areas. State governments can extend its provisions to excluded areas.
- It establishes the hierarchy of civil courts with District Courts subordinate to High Courts.
- Various terms are defined including "decree", "judgment", and "pleader".
- The Code establishes the jurisdiction and powers of civil courts to try all civil suits, subject to certain express or implied exceptions. Courts have jurisdiction to try suits involving rights to property or office.
The document provides an overview of the Legal Services Authority Act of 1987 in India. It discusses the establishment of the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) to provide legal aid to eligible citizens. Key points include:
1) NALSA oversees state-level legal services authorities that operate Lok Adalats, or people's courts, to settle disputes through conciliation and compromise rather than litigation.
2) The 2002 amendment established permanent Lok Adalats to expedite resolution for cases involving public utilities and settle matters at the pre-litigation stage.
3) Lok Adalats aim to provide speedy and low-cost justice, reduce case backlogs, and maintain cordial community relations through conc
Alternate Dispute Resolution Project for Law students (HNLU)AniruddhaMishra10
The document discusses various provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 relating to the competence and jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals in India. Some key points:
1. Section 16 provides that the arbitral tribunal has the power to rule on its own jurisdiction, including objections to the validity of the arbitration agreement. A decision rejecting a plea can be challenged through an application to set aside the arbitral award.
2. The tribunal is to treat parties equally and give each a full opportunity to present their case per Section 18.
3. Sections 19-26 cover determination of procedures, place of arbitration, commencement, language, statements of claim/defense, hearings, default of
Enforceability of foreign_judgments_and_foreign_awardsLegalServicesDelhi
With the advent of globalisation and with India poised as a major international and
global player in the world economy, it is apposite to consider the law concerning
enforcement of foreign judgments in India. In law, the enforcement of foreign
judgments is the recognition and enforcement rendered in another ("foreign")
jurisdiction. Foreign judgments may be recognized based on bilateral or multilateral
treaties or understandings, or unilaterally without an express international
agreement. The "recognition" of a foreign judgment occurs when the court of one
country or jurisdiction accepts a judicial decision made by the courts of another
"foreign" country or jurisdiction, and issues a judgment in substantially identical
terms without rehearing the substance of the original lawsuit.
This document summarizes the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 which consolidates and amends laws relating to civil procedure in courts of civil judicature in India. Some key points:
- It extends to the whole of India except Jammu and Kashmir, Nagaland, and some tribal areas. State governments can extend its provisions to excluded areas.
- It defines various terms used in civil procedure like "decree", "pleader", "judgment-debtor" etc.
- District courts are subordinate to high courts. Civil courts of lower grade are subordinate to district and high courts.
- It contains provisions around jurisdiction of courts, res judicata, bar on further suits, when foreign judgments
The adjudication of a civil court ends either in form of –
(i) Decree; or
(ii) Order
Decree means
According to section 2(2) "Decree" means the formal expression of an adjudication which conclusively determines the rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in the suit.
The document discusses various types of jurisdiction of courts in Pakistan. It explains that civil courts have the jurisdiction to try all civil suits unless expressly barred. It classifies jurisdiction into four types - subject matter jurisdiction, pecuniary jurisdiction, territorial jurisdiction, and personal jurisdiction. It provides details on each type of jurisdiction and the rules regulating them. The document also discusses various absolute bars, conditional bars, and special bars upon the jurisdiction of civil courts in Pakistan.
The document discusses Lok Adalats, which are permanent and continuous people's courts in India established under the Legal Services Authorities Act of 1987. Lok Adalats aim to provide an alternative dispute resolution mechanism that is faster and more cost-effective compared to regular courts. The document outlines the key provisions relating to Lok Adalats contained in Sections 19-22 of the Act, including how cases can be referred to Lok Adalats, the powers of Lok Adalats, and that their awards have the same status as a civil court decree. The benefits of Lok Adalats are also summarized, such as no court fees and a less formal procedure compared to courts. Finally, the differences between ordinary and permanent Lok Adal
mediation POWER POINT PRESENTATIONN.pptxadvpraballb
The Mediation Act of 2023 was passed by both houses of Parliament and received presidential assent, establishing mediation as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism. It applies to domestic and international commercial mediations involving Indian parties or conducted in India. The Act defines mediation agreements, sets timelines for completion of mediation, and makes mediated settlement agreements legally binding and enforceable. It also establishes rules regarding confidentiality, conduct of mediators, and community mediation to resolve local disputes. Overall, the Act provides a formal structure intended to promote wider use and effectiveness of mediation in India.
The document is a summary of the Money Laundering Prevention Act of 2012 in Bangladesh. It defines key terms related to money laundering such as proceeds of crime, predicate offense, and suspicious transactions. It outlines reporting requirements for financial institutions and gives investigation and enforcement powers to agencies such as the Anti-Corruption Commission. Penalties for money laundering and related offenses include imprisonment, fines, and property confiscation. The act also describes international cooperation measures between Bangladesh and other countries.
The High Court will hear the case between Meng and Ong because the offence of murder carries a potential death sentence. The High Court has original, appellate, revisionary, and supervisory jurisdiction over criminal and civil cases. It normally tries cases involving serious criminal offenses, such as those carrying the death penalty, and hears appeals from lower courts. The High Court also has the power to review decisions of administrative tribunals and native courts.
The document provides information on arbitration and enforcement of foreign judgments in Kuwait. It discusses:
- International treaties Kuwait has signed related to arbitration and enforcement, including the New York Convention.
- Kuwait's arbitration system being similar to other jurisdictions, using both institutional and judicial arbitration.
- The main arbitration bodies in Kuwait operating under its civil and commercial laws.
- Foreign arbitration decisions and court decisions being recognized based on reciprocity.
- Mandatory procedures that must be followed in Kuwaiti arbitration, including requirements for arbitration agreements.
This document summarizes the key provisions of the Civil Code of the United Arab Emirates relating to private international law and conflict of laws. It outlines which laws will apply to civil and commercial transactions, marriages, inheritance, contracts, property rights, and other matters depending on factors such as the nationality and residence of individuals involved. The code relies on principles of Islamic jurisprudence and ensures UAE law applies to matters taking place or involving property within the country.
THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996.pdfHarshitChopra17
This document provides the arrangement of sections of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in India. It includes 87 sections organized under 4 Parts and 10 Chapters that cover arbitration, enforcement of foreign awards, and conciliation. Some key points:
- It consolidates and amends the laws relating to domestic arbitration, international commercial arbitration, and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards.
- Part I covers arbitration and includes chapters on general provisions, arbitration agreements, composition of arbitral tribunals, jurisdiction, conduct of proceedings, awards, appeals, and miscellaneous provisions.
- Part II deals with enforcement of certain foreign awards under the New York Convention and Geneva Convention.
- Part III relates
This document defines key terms from the Civil Procedure Code related to decrees. It explains that a decree is the formal expression of an adjudication that conclusively determines the rights of parties in a suit. A decree must be the result of a judicial determination in a suit and formally express the outcome. It can be preliminary and determine further proceedings are needed, or final. Certain decisions like dismissing a case for default are considered orders, not decrees. Decrees are distinguished from judgments and orders. The document outlines the elements of and types of decrees according to Indian civil procedure law.
Similar to Preliminary decree for partition (article) (20)
This document provides a summary of 28 legal authorities and judgments related to Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) regarding the rejection of plaints. The key points made by the various judgments are: 1) the maintainability of a suit under Order 7 Rule 11 must be evaluated based only on the pleadings in the plaintiff without considering other evidence; 2) a plaint cannot be rejected if it discloses a cause of action or merely because the plaintiff may not succeed; and 3) the valuation and court fees provided by the plaintiff in their plaint should generally be accepted unless found to be unreasonable.
This document summarizes key judgements related to encroachment of common village lands and preservation of common resources for village communities. Specifically:
- Courts have ruled that land recorded as village commons, like grazing grounds and ponds, are meant for common use and cannot be allotted privately. Unauthorized construction on such land must be demolished.
- Grabbing of village commons through illegal means, with help from officials or politicians, has reduced available land over time. Courts say this cannot be regularized and stern action is needed.
- Ancestral village resources like ponds are important for drought-proofing and should be protected for community use, not converted to private housing. Most village ponds
This document summarizes important case laws related to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It discusses recent interpretations of Section 138 by courts, the objectives of amendments to this Section, and key rulings on issues such as what constitutes a valid notice, who can file complaints, the liability of directors and partners, and when proceedings can be quashed. Over 30 specific case laws are summarized dealing with issues such as absconding accused, stop payment notices, definition of a holder in due course, and the burden of proof for defendants.
useful judgment of probation of offender actarjun randhir
This document discusses judicial pronouncements related to the Probation of Offenders Act and Section 360 of the CrPC. It provides summaries of key sections of the Acts and discusses 7 cases related to granting or denying probation under the Acts. The document aims to provide useful guidance on the proper application and interpretation of provisions regarding probation of offenders.
This document provides a summary of 25 judicial rulings related to Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) pertaining to maintenance. Some key points from the rulings include:
1) Provisions of Section 125 CrPC should be construed liberally as it is a social welfare legislation aimed at providing speedy relief to destitute wives and children.
2) The nature of proceedings under Section 125 CrPC is civil, not criminal, and a strict burden of proof of marriage is not required.
3) Mental cruelty can be grounds for divorce or separate living if the conduct is grave and weighty.
4) A long-term live-in relationship may be presumed to be a
This document provides summaries of 32 important court cases related to the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act of 1954 in India. Key points addressed in the cases include:
- Mandatory requirements of rules like Rule 14 regarding cleaning and drying sample bottles must be proven by prosecution.
- Delay in sending sample analysis report to accused can result in acquittal.
- Entire sample of items like curd must be taken to be representative of the whole.
- Presumption of regular procedure does not apply if evidence shows requirements were not followed.
This document briefly explains the June compliance calendar 2024 with income tax returns, PF, ESI, and important due dates, forms to be filled out, periods, and who should file them?.
Defending Weapons Offence Charges: Role of Mississauga Criminal Defence LawyersHarpreetSaini48
Discover how Mississauga criminal defence lawyers defend clients facing weapon offence charges with expert legal guidance and courtroom representation.
To know more visit: https://www.saini-law.com/
Lifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point Presentationseri bangash
"Lifting the Corporate Veil" is a legal concept that refers to the judicial act of disregarding the separate legal personality of a corporation or limited liability company (LLC). Normally, a corporation is considered a legal entity separate from its shareholders or members, meaning that the personal assets of shareholders or members are protected from the liabilities of the corporation. However, there are certain situations where courts may decide to "pierce" or "lift" the corporate veil, holding shareholders or members personally liable for the debts or actions of the corporation.
Here are some common scenarios in which courts might lift the corporate veil:
Fraud or Illegality: If shareholders or members use the corporate structure to perpetrate fraud, evade legal obligations, or engage in illegal activities, courts may disregard the corporate entity and hold those individuals personally liable.
Undercapitalization: If a corporation is formed with insufficient capital to conduct its intended business and meet its foreseeable liabilities, and this lack of capitalization results in harm to creditors or other parties, courts may lift the corporate veil to hold shareholders or members liable.
Failure to Observe Corporate Formalities: Corporations and LLCs are required to observe certain formalities, such as holding regular meetings, maintaining separate financial records, and avoiding commingling of personal and corporate assets. If these formalities are not observed and the corporate structure is used as a mere façade, courts may disregard the corporate entity.
Alter Ego: If there is such a unity of interest and ownership between the corporation and its shareholders or members that the separate personalities of the corporation and the individuals no longer exist, courts may treat the corporation as the alter ego of its owners and hold them personally liable.
Group Enterprises: In some cases, where multiple corporations are closely related or form part of a single economic unit, courts may pierce the corporate veil to achieve equity, particularly if one corporation's actions harm creditors or other stakeholders and the corporate structure is being used to shield culpable parties from liability.
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने यह भी माना था कि मजिस्ट्रेट का यह कर्तव्य है कि वह सुनिश्चित करे कि अधिकारी पीएमएलए के तहत निर्धारित प्रक्रिया के साथ-साथ संवैधानिक सुरक्षा उपायों का भी उचित रूप से पालन करें।
Matthew Professional CV experienced Government LiaisonMattGardner52
As an experienced Government Liaison, I have demonstrated expertise in Corporate Governance. My skill set includes senior-level management in Contract Management, Legal Support, and Diplomatic Relations. I have also gained proficiency as a Corporate Liaison, utilizing my strong background in accounting, finance, and legal, with a Bachelor's degree (B.A.) from California State University. My Administrative Skills further strengthen my ability to contribute to the growth and success of any organization.
Sangyun Lee, 'Why Korea's Merger Control Occasionally Fails: A Public Choice ...Sangyun Lee
Presentation slides for a session held on June 4, 2024, at Kyoto University. This presentation is based on the presenter’s recent paper, coauthored with Hwang Lee, Professor, Korea University, with the same title, published in the Journal of Business Administration & Law, Volume 34, No. 2 (April 2024). The paper, written in Korean, is available at <https://shorturl.at/GCWcI>.
Guide on the use of Artificial Intelligence-based tools by lawyers and law fi...Massimo Talia
This guide aims to provide information on how lawyers will be able to use the opportunities provided by AI tools and how such tools could help the business processes of small firms. Its objective is to provide lawyers with some background to understand what they can and cannot realistically expect from these products. This guide aims to give a reference point for small law practices in the EU
against which they can evaluate those classes of AI applications that are probably the most relevant for them.
Synopsis On Annual General Meeting/Extra Ordinary General Meeting With Ordinary And Special Businesses And Ordinary And Special Resolutions with Companies (Postal Ballot) Regulations, 2018
Genocide in International Criminal Law.pptxMasoudZamani13
Excited to share insights from my recent presentation on genocide! 💡 In light of ongoing debates, it's crucial to delve into the nuances of this grave crime.
2. 2
Whether an order passed by a Court is a decree or not:
Test to determine: i) There must be adjudication; ii) Such
adjudication must have been given in a suit; iii)It must have determined the
rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in
the suit; iv) Such determination must be of a conclusive nature and; v) There
must be a formal expression of such adjudication. (See – S. Satnam Singh
and others v. Surender Kaur and another 2009 (4) MH. L.J. 6 (SC) Two
JJ)
It is settled law that there can be more than one preliminary decree in a
suit. Similarly, there can be more than one final decree in a suit. A decree
may be partly preliminary and partly final. The explanation to the sub
section makes it clear that a decree is preliminary when further proceedings
have to taken before suit can be completely disposed of. It is final when such
adjudication completely disposes of the suit. (Rachakonda Venkat Rao
and others V. R. Satya Bai(D) by L.R. and another AIR 2003 SC
3322(DB).,Ha sham Abbas Sayyad vs. Usman Abbas Sayyad & others
2007 (3) MH.L.J.56 (SC), Phoolchand and anr v. Gopal Lal (1967) 3
SCR 153, Mool Chand and ors. v. Dy. Director Consolidation and ors.
AIR 1995 SC 2493.
In certain situations, for the purpose of complete adjudication of the
disputes between the parties an appellate Court may also take into
consideration subsequent events after passing of the preliminary decree. (See
– Nachiappa Chettiar and ors. v. Subramaniam Chettiar (1960) 2
SCR 209. So there can be amendment of preliminary decree, S. Satnam
Singh and ors. Surender Kaur and other 2009 (4) MH. L.J. 6 (SC)Two
JJ)
The substantive provision, namely, section 54 requires that partition
of estate or separation of share in the estate assessed to the payment of
revenue to the Government shall be made by the Collector or any gazetted
subordinate deputed by him in that behalf in accordance with law (if any) for
the time being in force relating to the partition, or the separate possession of
shares of such estates.
Section54 reads thus:
“54. Partition of estate or separation of share.
Where the decree is for the partition of an undivided estate assessed to
the payment of revenue to the Government, or for the separate possession of
a share of such an estate, the partition of the estate or the separation of the
share shall be made by the Collector or any gazetted subordinate of the
Collector deputed by him in this behalf, in accordance with the law (if any),
3. 3
for the time being in force relating to the partition, or the separate
possession of shares, of such estates”.
The provisions of Order 20, Rule 18 provides for mechanism for execution of
decrees in the suit for partition of property or separate possession of the
shares therein. The said provisions thus, reads:
“0 20, R.18. Decree in suit for partition or separate possession of a
share therein where the Court passes a decree for the partition of property
or for the separate possession of a share therein, then –
(1) If and in so far as the decree relates to an estate assessed to
the payment of revenue to the Government, the decree shall
declare the rights of the several parties interested in the
property, but shall direct such partition or separation to be
made by the Collector, or any gazetted subordinate of the
Collector deputed by him in this behalf, in accordance with
such declaration and with the provisions of section 54;
(2) If and in so far as such decree relates to any other
immovable property or to movable property, the Court may,
if the partition or separation cannot be conveniently made
without further inquiry, pass a preliminary decree declaring
the rights of the several parties interested in the property
and giving such further direction as may be required.”
The other relevant provisions for the purposes of execution of decree in suit
for partition is under Order 20, Rule 13.
It reads thus:
“O.26, R.13. Commission to make partition of immovable property
Where a preliminary decree for partition has been passed, the court
may, in any case not provided for by section 54, issue a commission to such
person as it thinks fit to make the partition or separation according to the
rights as declared in such decree.”
Thus, from the above provisions it is clear that where the decree
relates to any immovable property and the partition or separation cannot be
conveniently made without further inquiry, then the Court may pass a
preliminary decree declaring the rights of several parties interested in the
property and giving such further direction as may be required. The
preliminary decree for partition is only a declaration of the rights of the
parties and shares they have in the joint family or coparcenary property, the
subject matter of the suit. If the subject matter is the agricultural lands
assessable to revenue, all further proceedings are to be taken before the
Collector or any gazetted officer subordinate to him, to whom the powers
were delegated by the Collector as per Section 54 read with Order 20, Rule
4. 4
18 of the CPC. When matter goes before the Collector, he has to pass final
decree by coming to the conclusion, how the land should be partitioned
between the parties and then he has to execute the decree actually by putting
the parties in possession allotted to them as observed in Annsaheb 2001(3)
Mh.L.J.53, Ramabai AIR 1945 Bom.338, Kisan 2000(4) Mh.L.J.485.
The Order 20, Rule 18 (1) refers to a preliminary decree. The
preliminary decree in a partition action is a step in the suit, which continues
until the final decree is passed.
In this connection let now see the position of law.
In Ramrathibai wd/o Sivanath Pardeshi vs. Surajal Bhanlal
Choudhari and others 1996 (2) Mh.L.J.40 (SB) (Nag), in a suit for
partition and separate possession which included agricultural lands,
preliminary decree was passed on 911947 with respect to property other
than agricultural land and final decree on the same date regarding
agricultural lands. The decree was confirmed in appeal on 211948. On 152
92, the decreeholder made an application before the trial Court for issuance
of precept to the Collector under section 54 of CPC, for partition of the said
lands pursuant to the decree.
It was held that in the final decree as passed on 9147, it was ordered
that the Collector should partition the agricultural lands and a precept be
issued to the Collector on an application by the plaintiff and on payment of
costs necessary for the purpose and on filling the requisite copies. Such an
application for issuance of the precept could not be said to be an application
for execution of the decree. It was only a request to the Court to do the
ministerial act and was neither governed by section 48 of the Civil Procedure
Code, as it existed prior to 111964, nor governed by Article182 of the
Limitation Act, 1908, or the Limitation Act, 1963. The direction was given to
issue precept to the Collector.
In the case of Jacinto and another vs. Fernandez 41BLR921= AIR
1939 Bom.454, it was held that an application to send the decree to Collector
for effecting a partition, being only request to the Court to do a ministerial
act, is not governed by the said Article182. It was further held that when an
order is made for partition of lands assessed to Government revenue, the
Court makes an order decreeing partition and directing the parties to be put
in possession and referring it to the Collector to carry out the partition. It
was also held that when an order in that form is made, the Courts duties are
finished, and it is for the Collector to partition the property and put the
parties into possession.
5. 5
Whether the decree is taken to be preliminary or final, in the case of
Jesinglal vs. Gangadhar 40 BLR 507, it was pointed out that it was only
in the case of preliminary decrees in mortgage suits that an application for
making it final is expressly required by Order 34 of CPC. The provisions in
the CPC in respect of partition and partnership suits are different and refer
to various provisions, which require the Court passing the preliminary
decree in such suits to take the necessary steps suomotu. It was, thus, held
that Article181 is also not applicable.
Section 54 of CPC provides that the decree for partition of the
agricultural lands i.e. the estate assessed to the payment of revenue to the
Government, or for separate possession of a share of such an estate passed
by the Civil Court, shall be effected by the Collector or any gazetted
subordinate of the Collector. (Chandmal vs. Shantilal AIR 2003 Bom.
445, (SB)
In Ramabai Govind vs. Anant Daji AIR 1945 Bom.338 (FB), it
was held that “if for these various reason such a decree be regarded as
preliminary, it would follow an application made by a party to a decree under
Order 20, Rule 18 (1), asking that the papers should be sent to the Collector
for effecting a partition as directed in it is of the nature of a mere proceeding
in the suit rather than an application to execute the decree, and that there is
no period of limitation for making it.” It was held that when making
partition the Collector does not purport to make a final decree. He proceeds
from division by metes and bounds to delivery of possession as in one
proceeding, and not as if he was conducting two distinct proceedings, one
equivalent to a proceeding in suit, and the other to a proceeding in execution.
It was further considered the question that if the decree is regarded as
the final decree, still then such an application asking the Court for issuance
of the precept to the Collector is not an application for execution of the decree
and only a request to the Court to do ministerial act for sending the papers to
the concerned Collector. It was held thus, “if on this line of reasoning the
decree be regarded as final, it must be called that not every final decree is
capable of execution. A merely declaratory decree, though final, is by its very
nature, incapable of execution, so, too, is a decree under Order 20, R.18 (1),
CPC. It merely declares what are the shares of the parties in the suit lands
assessed to Government revenue and whom the partition is to be effected, but
it does not embody a direct order to the Collector or to the judgmentdebtor to
do anything. From this point of view it is merely declaratory. It is true that
section 54 appears in the Civil Procedure Code under the heading “procedure
and execution.” That section may have been placed before only to show that
7. 7
Rajah Mantripragada Venkata Hanumantha Rao Bahadur AIR (32)
1945 Madras 336, as to whether when a decree for partition of an undivided
estate assessed to the payment of revenue to the Government directs that a
partition shall be made by the Collector or any gazetted subordinate of his,
the Court which passes the decree has power to hear objections to the
partition as made by the Collector of his subordinate and modify that
decision ? The Full Bench answered the question in the negative, and it was
thus held
“The Court which has passed a decree for partition to which section 54
applies and has sent it to the Collector for the purpose of effecting the
partition has no power to hear objections to the partition made by the
Collector or his subordinate or to modify the partition. It was further
observed that the Court retains complete control over the partition
proceedings when it is a case of dividing immovable property which is not an
estate assessed to land revenue, but where the partition is of an estate
assessed to such revenue, the Court has no control over the Collector. Once
the Court has sent the decree to the Collector for action under section 54, the
matter passes entirely out of its hands.
In Sanjay Dinkar Asarkar vs. State of Maharashtra AIR 1986
SC 414, it was observed that under section 54 of the CPC, 1908, where a
decree for the partition of an undivided estate assessed to the payment of
revenue to the Government or for the separate possession of a share of such
an estate is passed, the partition of the estate or the separation of share is to
be made by the Collector or any gazetted officer subordinate to the Collector
deputed by him in that behalf. Rule 18 (1) of Order 20 of the code makes a
similar provision. Thus, in the case of a partition decree of land assessed to
the payment of revenue to the Government, the execution of such decree by
actually effecting partition and giving separate possession of a share of such
land is to be effected by the Collector or any gazetted subordinate deputed by
him in that behalf.
It is held in the case of Sindhu Machindra Jagtap vs. Collector,
Collector Office, Beed 2007(4) MH.L.J.180 (SB) , that the Collector is duty
bound to act upon the precept for effecting partition as per Section 54 of
CPC.
While dealing with question as to what is the extent of jurisdiction of a
Revenue officer while executing the decree sent to him under section 54 in
respect of the objections to the proposed partition, the Bombay High Court
Bench at Aurangabad in Khajabhai s/o Abdullasaheb Lukade and
8. 8
others vs. Mohanmed Ishaq s/o Abdullasaheb Lukade and others
1992(1) Mh.L.J.262, held that section 54 of the Code of CPC, 1908, carves
out an exception to the general rule that the Civil Courts would be competent
to execute the decree passed by the Civil Court. If the property or a part of it
is subjected to the land revenue, then the execution petition in respect of
such property will have to be sent to the Collector under section 54 of CPC.
Collector should execute the decree himself or appoint any gazetted officer
subordinate to him to execute the said decree of partition.
It was further held that if an agricultural land is to be partitioned, the
partition will have to make normally by measurement and cadastral
surveyor does the measurement. When Tahasildar or any other officer
subordinate to the Collector is entrusted with the job of execution of partition
decree or directs the District Inspector of Land Record or any officers
subordinate to him to measure the land and submit a report proposing the
partition, such cadastral surveyor or the measurement officer is nothing
more than a commissioner appointed under Order 26 Rule 13 of the CPC.
Report of the measuring officer is to be considered by the Tahasildar or the
officer executing the partition under section 54 and he has to apply his mind.
For the purposes of execution of a partition decree involving an estate
subjected to the land revenue, Tahasildar steps into the shoes of the Civil
Court executing the decree. Therefore, such officers are under a bounden
duty to apply their mind to report about the proposed partition and they
cannot refuse to exercise the jurisdiction vested in them. Normally a report
of the commissioner on partition decree need not be interfered into because
the report is based on local authority. But the jurisdiction vested in the
Court, who is with the Tahasildar or revenue officer and this jurisdiction
cannot be delegated to the measuring Inspectors.
In Paygonda Survgonda Patil and others vs. Jingonda
Survgonda Patil and others AIR 1968 Bombay 198, it was held that an
Order passed by the revenue officers under section 54 of the CPC, 1908,
would be subject to the right of appeal as given by the relevant provisions of
the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966. The Order of Tahasildar in such
situation is subject to appeal under section 247 of the Maharashtra Land
Revenue Code before the Sub Divisional officer as provided in Schedule E.
It would be desirable to quote the relevant provisions of section 85 of
the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 and the rules, 1967, framed
there under.
9. 9
Section. 85. – Partition. _ (1) Subject to the provisions of the Bombay
Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947, a
holding may be partitioned of the decree of a Civil Court or on application of
coholders in the manner hereinafter provided.
(2) If in holding there are more than one coholder, any such coholder
may apply to the Collector for a partition of his share in the holding;
Provided that, where any question as to title is raised, no such
partition shall be made until such question has been decided by a civil
suit
(3) (The Collector) may, after hearing the coholders, divide the
holding and apportion the assessment of the holding in accordance
with the rules made by the state Government under this Code.
(5) Expenses properly incurred in making partition of a holding
paying revenue to the state Government shall be recoverable as
revenue demand in such proportion as the Collector may think fit from
the coholders at whose request the partition is made, or from the
persons interested in the partition.
The Maharashtra land Revenue (Partition of Holdings) Rules, 1967.
Rule. 5. Mode of effecting partition: If the Collector does not reject
the application, he shall proceed to effect the partition either personally or
through such agency as he may appoint. So far as practicable, whole survey
numbers of subdivision of survey numbers shall be allotted and recourse to
further division as far as possible, be allotted to each party and care should
be taken to ensure that the productivity of the area allotted to each party is
in proportion to his share in the holding.
Rule. 6. Apportionment of assessment: The assessment of the
holding shall be distributed in proportion to the shares held, in the holding
by the coholders, so however that when the total assessment of all the sub
divisions of any survey number in such holding falls short of, or exceeds, the
whole assessment of that survey number, the difference shall be equitably
distributed over the subdivisions by addition or deduction in the assessment
so as to make the total equal to the assessment of the patent survey number.
Rule. 7. Procedure before confirmation of partition: After the
partition has been completed the Collector shall hear any objections, which
the parties may, make, and shall either amend or confirm the partition. The
10. 10
partition shall take effect from the commencement of the agricultural year
next following the date of such amendment or confirmation of the partition.
Rule. 8. Recovery of expenses of partition: Expenses of partition
shall be recoverable by the Collector from the parties in the manner provided
in subsection (5) of section 85.
Rule. 9. Partition under decree of Civil Court: When any holding is
ordered to be partitioned under decree or order of a Civil Court, the
provisions of Rule, 5, 6 and 7 shall apply in relation to partition a holding on
the application of a coholder.
Rule. 10. Saving: No holding shall be partitioned under the
provisions of these rules, if such partition results in creating a holding less in
extent than the standard area determined by the State Government under
the provisions of the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation And
Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947.
It is also necessary to point out that the Collector has got power under
Section 8AA, of the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and
Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947, to fix up the amount of
compensations and its apportionment, in case it is found that there was not
enough land to provide for the shares of all the cosharers in accordance with
the provisions of subsection (1) of Section 8AA,of above Act.
In Baban Shamrao Menghare and Others Vs Madhukar S/o
Shamrao Menghare and Others, 2007 (1) MH.L.J. 306 , it has been held
that once preliminary decree for partition is passed in respect of land
assessable to the payment of land revenue and a precept is sent to collector,
collector takes action, all the proceedings would lie before the collector. The
remedy would be under Land Revenue Code. The only exception is that, if
certain subsequent event takes place, necessitating variation in the shape
then the Civil Court would have jurisdiction to pass another preliminary
decree for varying the shares of the parties.(Also see Arun Ashruba
Mhaske vs Atmaram Dattu Mhaske 2007 (4)MH.L.J. 157(SB). In
Anandrao Ganpatrao Belkhode and others vs. Aziz Haq Hazil Abdul
Bari deaceased L Rs, and others, 1997(3) Mh.L.J.419 (SB) (Nag), in a
suit for partition of agricultural lands and house property, preliminary
decree was passed by the Civil Court. The Tahasildar prepared the proposal
for partition and submitted it before the Civil Court prior to finalization of
the same. The Civil Judge by his Order directed allotment of particular land
to the share of the decree holders. The decree holders filed execution petition
and obtained possession of the land as allotted. It was held that the Civil
11. 11
Court had performed the act of partition of the property assessed to land
revenue and so also the Civil Court had given the delivery of possession. The
whole proceedings so far as the partition and delivery of possession of land
assessed to land revenue were concerned were misconceived and violative of
the statutory provisions of the law.
It was further held that it is well settled that in respect of the
agricultural lands, which are assessed to land revenue, if the partition is to
be effected and/or a share has to be carved out as per the decree of the Court,
it is the Collector or his subordinate gazetted officer, who can effect the said
partition and deliver the possession of the share as per the decree of the Court.
The provisions of section 54 of CPC are very much clear. The Civil Court was
functus officio after the precept was sent to the Tahasildar for effecting the
partition as per preliminary decree and there was no circumstance which
warranted any sort of interference in the act of partition, which was to be
completed by the Collector or his subordinate gazetted officer under section
54 of the CPC read with section 85 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code
and the rules framed there under. It was none of the business of the Civil
Court to give directions to allot specific land.
It was further observed that, the decree made in the form of Order 20,
Rule 18 (1), technically must be classified as a final decree and further
relying on the case of Ramabai (AIR 1945 Bom.338), and Ningappa
(AIR 1956 Bom.345), it was held that after a decree for partition of lands
assessed to revenue has been passed, the Court has nothing further to do
with the decree. The decree is to be executed and the partition is to be
effected by the Collector. There cannot, therefore, be any executing
proceedings before the Court in the case of such a decree.
Thus, it is seen that if such direction is given then it is usurped
illegality of Civil Court and in complete violation of the provisions of law the
jurisdiction of the revenue authority under section 54 by entertaining the
darkhast for issuing the possession warrant for delivery of possession. While
effecting the said partition the land in possession of the transferee, cannot be
said at this stage, will be maintained with the transferee by the Collector,
because the Collector will have to carry out the partition of the agricultural
lands, as provided in section 85 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code read
with the rules framed there under. While effecting the said partition, the
Collector is entitled to hear the transferee or third person in possession of
the land, but while effecting the equitable partition whether it will be
appropriate to keep the property of the transferee or said person is a
13. 13
It is necessary to bear in mind that if the papers under Section 54 of
the CPC have been wrongly transmitted or directed and the partition has not
yet been done, made or commenced, the Court has power to recall the papers
transmitted to the Collector as held in N.R.Patil vs. Kariappa AIR 1965
Mysore.46. It is necessary to note that a Civil Court, however, order
partition even of revenue estate when the Collector refuses to make such
partition though it is not ordinarily open to Civil Court to effect partition of
revenue paying property as held in Sewakram vs. Chunnilal 1951
Nagpur Law Journal 40 (SB). The reason behind is that the effect has to
be given by the Court to the decree passed by it.
It is necessary to bear in mind that the transferees during the
pendency of suit for partition of parts of an estate assessed to payment of
land revenue to the Government which is the subject matter of the suit have
locus standi to appear before the Revenue Authorities in proceedings under
section 54 and ask for an equitable partition of the lands even though they
had not been impleaded as parties to the suit in the Civil Court. One of the
ways of protection the said estate of the transferees is to get the lands of the
transferees allotted to the share of the defendant against whom the
proceedings for partition are going on and the said act of partition can be
done without causing any prejudice to the plaintiff’s share. That all requires
to be considered by the Collector while effecting the partition as held in
Khemchand Shankar choudhary vs. Vishnu Hari Patil AIR 1983 SC
124,chandmal Dongarmal Shelot v. Shantilal Valchand Shelot AIR
2003 Bom 445,Mannubai Nandgopal Pande V. Shivprasad Nandlal
Pande 1979 Mh. L. J.252. (However the transferee cannot ask for reopening
of preliminary decree because such matters became final)
In Ramagounda Rudragowda Patil and vs. Smt Lagmavva and
others AIR 1985 Karnataka 83, it was held that the Civil Court only
declares the shares of the parties and the authority concern has to effect
partition of division by metes and bounds, as envisaged by Section 54 of CPC.
Collector is the authority concern to effect partition. Once the papers are sent
to the Collector, the Civil Court has no control over the proceedings taken by
the Collector. The Civil Court cannot direct the Collector to effect partition in
a particular manner after the papers were sent to him. Therefore, section
makes it absolutely clear that the execution is not at all contemplated in the
case of decrees for partition and division of agricultural lands. What the Civil
Court has to do is to transmit the papers to the Collector for actual partition
and possession. Therefore, all execution petitions are to be filed in the Civil
Court requesting the Court to transmit the papers to the Collector for
partition and possession of agricultural lands. They are not, in any sense of
14. 14
the term execution petitions. They are only in the form of request to the court
to do its duty as enjoyed on it by section 54 of CPC.
In Muppana Halappa vs. Channeppa Halappa and another AIR
1964 Mysore.169, it was held that the powers and functions of Collector
under Section 54 are analogous to the powers and functions of the Civil
Court in the final decree proceedings for partition of properties other than an
estate.
The Collector in effecting the partition and separating the shares
performs a quasijudicial function and not a ministerial duty. He is bound to
hear the parties and consider their objections to the proposed partition
scheme before making it final. If he accepts or rejects the objections of any of
the parties to the partition scheme, he is bound to give reasons. His final
order effecting the partition and separating the shares is subject to correction
by the higher authorities on appeal under the provisions of the Bombay Land
Revenue Code or other analogous law.
In Kisan Bhikaji Dalvi since deceased through L Rs. Mohan
Kisan Dalvi and others vs.Krishanbai Maruti Dalvi 2000(4)Mh.
L.J.485(SB)(Aurangabad),it was held that when there is declaration of
shares in the partition suit with respect to lands, assessed to land revenue,
the job of the Civil Court come to an end by making such a declaration and
all further proceedings regarding effecting partition, may be by first
preparing a final decree and then by executing the same is to be carried out
by the Collector, as per the provisions of Section 54, CPC. The further steps
in such a suit are to be taken by the Collector and for that purpose, the Civil
Court has to transmit the papers to the Collector. Thereafter the Collector
has to take appropriate steps for partition, as per the directions issued in the
decree. It is not expected that the Civil Court prepare any final decree.
It was further held that the decree declaring shares of the parties in a
suit for partition is definitely a preliminary decree. When there is
preliminary decree with respect to land, assessable to land revenue, all
further proceedings are to be taken before the Collector or any gazetted
officer subordinate to him to whom the powers are delegated by the Collector
as per the provisions of Section 54 read with Order XX, Rule.18 CPC. The
Civil Court has no say in the matter as to how the land be partitioned
between the parties, so as to say for preparing the final decree. If the person
had any grievance about the order passed by the Collector, then he has a
remedy to file appeal before the authority under the Land Revenue Code, to
which appeal is maintainable against the order of the Collector and the
15. 15
application in the Civil Court itself was not maintainable. The contention
that the decree was only a preliminary decree and therefore it could not be
executed without final decree is misconceived.
The decree cannot be effective without there being a final decree. Until
rights in the final decree proceedings are worked out and till a final decree in
that behalf is made there is no formal expression of the adjudication,
conclusively determining the rights of the parties with regard to the
properties for partition in terms of decree, so far as to entitle the party to
make an application for execution of final decree. The final decree has to
specify the division by metes and bounds and it needs to be engrossed on
requisite stamp papers. Until final decree determining rights of the parties
by metes and bounds is drawn up and engrossed on stamp papers supplied
by the parties, there is no executable final decree in the eye of law. Therefore
executing Court cannot receive the preliminary decree unless final decree is
passed as provided under Order 20, R.18 of CPC. (Also see Baban
Shamrao Menghare and Others Vs Madhukar Shamrao Menghare
and Others, 2007 (1) Mh.L.J. 306)
While dealing with the issue as to “ whether the execution
proceeding/darkhast, for execution of the decree passed under Order 20, R.
18 (1) of CPC, was tenable when no steps for execution thereof were taken by
the decreeholders within a period of twelve years from the date of passing
the decree, the High Court in Annasaheb Rajaram Nagane and another
vs. Rajaram Maruti Nagane and another 2001(3) Mh.L.J.53 (SB)
(Bom), after considering the decisions in D. M.Jacinto AIR 1939 Bom.454,
which has been approved by Full Bench of the same High Court in
Ramabai’s case AIR 1945 Bom.338, and the provisions of Section 54 and
Order 20, R.18 of CPC, it was held that the decree in question was
preliminary with respect to the lands assessable to revenue, all further
proceedings are to be taken before the Collector or any gazetted officer
subordinate to him, to whom the powers were delegated by the Collector as
per Section 54 read with Order 20, R. 18 of CPC (Also see Arun Ashruba
Mhaske vs. Atamaram Dattu Mhaske 2007 (4) MH.L.J.157(SB)).
It was further held that the Civil Court has no say in the matter as to
how the land is to be partitioned between the parties, so as to say, for
preparing final decree. It was also held that it was obligatory on the part of
the Civil Court to transfer papers to the Collector for effecting partition as per
declaration made in the judgment. All further proceedings with respect to
such decree are to be taken up by and before the Collector. As a matter of fact,
it was not necessary for the applicants/decreeholders to move or make an
16. 16
application to the Court to send the decree to the Collector. It was the duty of
the Court to send necessary papers to the Collector as per the directions
given in the decree itself and at no point of time executable final decree took
birth, so as to attract the provisions of Limitation Act, holding that, an
application, even if made in the form of darkhast application with a prayer to
send decree papers to the Collector, was not an application in execution. In
such situation the provisions of Limitation Act did not attract.
In Annasaheb’s case referred to above, the decree in question for
partition and separate possession of the movable and immovable properties
inter alia including the agricultural lands could not be sent to Collector till
12th
August, 1986, though the suit was decreed on 27th
November. In
darkhast No. 19/1984 the decreeholders were directed to supply further
details as asked by D.I.L.R. on 21st
April 1988. The said darkhast was
dismissed since the decreeholders failed to supply the details. The second
darkhast no. 12 of 1998 also came to be dismissed interalia holding that the
said darkhast application was barred by limitation prescribed under Article
136, of the Limitation Act, 1963 and earlier order dismissing execution
application in default operated as res judicata. After considering the decision
in Shankar Balwant Lokhande vs. Chandrakant Shankar Lokhande,
AIR 1995 SC 1211 (DB)[Order 20,R.18 (2) and R. 7 and sec. 2 (2) CPC] and
in Bashiruddin vs. Binraj AIR 1987 Bom.235, it was held that the decree
relates to any immovable property and the partition or separation cannot be
conveniently made without further inquiry, then the Court may pass a
preliminary decree declaring the rights of several parties interested in the
property and giving such further direction as may be required. In a suit for
partition by a coparcener or cosharer, the Court is not expected to give
decree only for the plaintiffs share but it has to consider the shares of all the
heirs after making them parties and then to pass a preliminary decree. The
preliminary decree for partition is only a declaration of the rights of the
parties and the shares they have in the joint family or coparcenary property,
the subject matter of the suit. Final decree proceedings are mere
continuation of the preliminary decree proceedings and there is no
executable decree unless final decree proceedings are finally disposed of. The
executing court cannot receive executable decree unless final decree is
passed, drawn up and engrossed on the requisite stamped papers. Till such
time there is no executable decree so as to attract the provisions of the
Limitation Act, 1963. The final decree has to specify the division by metes
and bounds and it needs to be engrossed on the requisite stamped papers.
Until final determining rights of the parties by metes and bound is drawn up
and engrossed on stamp papers supplied by the parties, there is no
executable final decree in the eye of law. After final decree is passed and
20. 20
Note. Section 51of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959, before
amendment provided that no stamp duty is payable where court fee is paid
in a suit for partition. By Bombay Court Fees (Amendment) Act, 1994, (34 of
1994) it is now provided that on a final Order for effecting a partition in any
civil suit, stamp duty should be payable but it should be reduced by the
amount paid as court fee in such suit of partition.
In view of the abovecited decisions, it is clear that –
1. There cannot be an application for execution of the decree as
provided under Order 20, Rule 18(1) for effecting partition of lands
assessed to payment of revenue before Civil Court. (AIR 1945
Bom.338, 2001(3) Mh.L.J.53, 1996(2) Mh.L.J. 40)
2. The preliminary decree is one, which declares the rights and
liabilities of the parties leaving the actual result to be worked out in
further proceeding (AIR 1995 SC 1211, AIR 2003 SC 3322).
3. A decree may be partly preliminary and partly final. There can
be more than one preliminary decree in a suit. Similarly, there can be
more than one final decree in a suit. (AIR 2003 SC 3322)
4. After passing of preliminary decree for partition as provided
under Order 20, R.18 (2), the decree cannot be made effective without
there being a final decree. (2001(3) MH.L.J.53, AIR 1995 SC 1211)
5. Until rights in the final decree proceedings are worked out and
till a final decree in that behalf is made as provided under Order 20,
R. 18(2), there is no formal expression of the adjudication conclusively
determining the rights of the parties with regard to the properties for
partition in terms of decree so as to entitle the party to make an
application for execution of final decree. (2001(3) MH.L.J.53, Para
714(h), Civil Manual, 1986, AIR 1995 SC 1211,O.26, R.14)
6. Final decree as provided under Order 20, R. 18(2) has to specify
the division by metes and bounds and has to be engrossed on
requisite stamp papers after which it becomes executable, but it
is subject to the provisions of Section 51 of Bombay Court Fees
Act, 1959 (as amendment by Mah. Act No.34of1994). Because
the Court retains complete control over the partition
proceedings when it is a case of dividing immovable property,
which is not estate, assessed to land revenue till preparation of
final decree, and ordered to be engrossed on requisite stamp.
21. 21
(2001(3) Mh.L.J.53, AIR 1945 Mad. 336, AIR 1995 SC 1211,Sec.
51,Bom Court Fees Act (as amended in 1994), Sec.2 (m) and
Art.46 of Bombay Stamp Act, 1958).
7. Preliminary decree as provided under Order 20,R.18 (1) for
partition and separate possession of the property assessed to payment
of land revenue, the partition be effected in term of Sec. 54 of the CPC
by the Collector, who performs a quasijudicial function and
considered the objections of the parties including transferee to the
proposed partition scheme before making it final which would be
subject to correction by the higher authority on appeal under the
provisions of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code,1966,and the
Maharashtra Land Revenue (Partition of Holdings) Rules, 1967.The
Civil Court has nothing to do with decree and courts duties are
finished. It means the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to pass the final
decree and execute the same after the matter was referred to the
Collector under Section 54 read with O.20, R.18 (1) of the CPC. (AIR
1986 SC 414, 1992(1) Mh.L.J. 262,AIR 1968 Bom.198, AIR 1939
Bom.454, AIR 1946 Nag 353,AIR 1974 MP 12,AIR 1964 Mys.169, AIR
1983 SC 124, 2000(4) Mh.L.J.485, 1997(3) Mh.L.J.419). AIR 1956Bom.
345,AIR 1945 Bom.338, 2001(3) Mh.L.J.53, AIR 1984 P&H 240,AIR
2003 Bom.445, 1979 Mh.L.J.252)
8. A merely declaratory decree, though final, is by very its nature
incapable of execution, so too, is a decree under Order 20, R.18 (1) and
so after passing of preliminary decree as provided under Section 54
read with O.20, R.18 (1) CPC, it is the duty of the Court to send the
necessary papers to the Collector as per the directions given in the
decree itself which must be deemed to be a part of the decree. It is not
necessary for the decreeholders to move or make any application to
the court to send the decree to the Collector and so the decree is final
so far as Civil Courts are concerned. But the decreeholder to pay costs
necessary for the purpose and on filling of requisite copies. (AIR 1945
Bom.338, 1996 (2) Mh.L.J.40, 2001(3) Mh.L.J.53, AIR 1959 Mys.233,
2000(4) Mh.L.J.485, AIR 1963 SC 992)
9. The steps taken by the decreeholder in this regard is just to
remind the Court of its duty and such application is really nothing but
a request to the Judge or Court to discharge his ministerial duty and
not execution of the decree and so Art. 182 (new 136) of Limitation Act
are not attracted. (AIR 1939 Bom.454, 2001(3) Mh.L.J.53, AIR 1959
Mys.233, 1996(2) Mh.L.J.40)
22. 22
10. Civil Court order partition even of revenue paying estate when
the Collector refuses to make such partition or contravenes the
decreetal Order, or transgresses the law or otherwise acts ultravires
and Civil Court retains control in that situation only. (AIR1945
Bom.338, AIR 1965 Mys.46, 1997(3) Mh.L.J.419, AIR 1956 Bom. 345,
2003(2) Mh.L.J.216).
11. After preliminary decrees are passed further action for final
decrees is to be taken by the court without any application from a
party (e.g. decree under Rules12 (1)(b), 13, 15, 16 and 18(2) of Order
20,CPC) should be treated as pending and shown as such in the
quarterly returns. (714(h) Civil Manual, 1986, 2001(3) Mh.L.J.53)
12. Suits in which after preliminary decrees are passed, subsequent
proceedings for passing decrees do not arise as a matter of course (e.g.
decree under Rr.12 (1) C and R.18 (1) of Order 20, and Rules 2 to 8 of
O. 34 CPC) should be shown as disposed of in the quarterly
returns. (2001(3) Mh.L.J.53, Para 714 (h) Civil Manual, 1986)
13.In case there is possibility of any change in the extent of shares
of the parties due to subsequent events, the parties may again
approach the Civil Court for making the necessary change in
the declaration of shares made earlier. In that event, another
decree would be passed by the court declaring the shares of
parties in view of the changed circumstances and the said
decree would be send to the Collector for effecting partition of
the agricultural lands. (AIR 1967 SC 1470, 1993(2)
Mh.L.J.1035).
14.If the property is impartible it is open to apply for placing the
suit for final decree for auctioning the property.(Hasham Abbas
Sayyed vs.Usman Abbas Sayyed (2007) 2 SCC 355)
At this stage it is necessary to point out the case of Bhoop
Singh vs. Ram Singh Major and others 1995(2) Mh.L.J.916 (Two
JJ)(Supreme Court) , K. Raghunandan & Ors vs. Ali Hussain
Sabir & Ors. 2008 DGLS(Soft) 672(SC)(Two JJ) wherein the
provisions of Section 17(2)(vi) of Registration Act has been considered.
The petitioner is one of the defendants in the suit. The plaintiffs are
heirs of one Nand Ram, who is one of the five sons of one Jeevan Ram.
The petitioner belongs to the branch of Rakha Ram, another son of
Jeevan Ram. Ganpat was a son of Nanha Ram, still another son of
23. 23
Jeevan Ram. The present suit was filed claiming onethird share in
the suit land as heirs of Jeevan Ram. The petitioner’s contention was
that in view of the order passed in suit no. 215/1973, filed by him
declaring that the plaintiff will be the owner in possession from today
in lieu of the defendant after his death and the plaintiff deserves his
name to be incorporated as such in the revenue papers, the dispute
does not survive and he alone is entitled to be in possession of the suit
land. The suit was dismissed and confirmed up to High Court
observing that the aforesaid decree not having been registered, the
same could not have conferred any right on the petitioner. Whether on
the strength of the decree passed in suit No. 215/73, the petitioner
could sustain his case as put up in his written statement in the
present suit despite the decree not have been registered, the Court
held that the petitioner cannot sustain his case on two reasons,
namely:
1) The decree having purported to create right or title in the
plaintiff for the first time that is not being a declaration of
preexisting right did require registration. It may also be
pointed out that the first suit cannot really be said to have
decreed on the basis of compromise, as the suit was decreed
“in view of the written statement filed by the defendant
admitting the claim of the plaintiff to be correct.” Decreeing
of suit in such a situation is covered by Order 12, Rule 6,
and not by Order 23, Rule 3, which deals with compromise
of suit, whereas the former is on the subject of judgment on
admissions.
2) A perusal of the impugned judgment shows that the
first appellate Court held the decree in question as
‘collusive’ as it was with a view to defeat the right of others
who had bona fide claim over the property of Ganpat.
Learned Judge of the High Court also took the same view.
The petition was dismissed.
While dealing with the question of compulsorily registrable
of order or decree of Court in the case of preexisting right and
creating new right in immovable property of the value of
Rs.100/ or upwards, the Court held that it would be the duty of
the Court to examine in each case whether the parties have pre
existing right to the immovable property, or whether under the
order or decree of the Court one party having right, title or