{"id":219976,"date":"2019-09-25T15:30:56","date_gmt":"2019-09-25T10:00:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=219976"},"modified":"2019-10-11T15:01:27","modified_gmt":"2019-10-11T09:31:27","slug":"sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/","title":{"rendered":"SL CoA | Court cannot decide against a person who is not a party to the suit; Payment of fine did not give authority to Plaintiff to continue to violate the conditions of the permit in suit for declaration, appeal allowed"},"content":{"rendered":"

Court of Appeal of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka<\/strong>: Mahinda Samayawardhena, J. contemplated an appeal against the judgment passed by the District Court in a suit for declaration.<\/p>\n

The factual matrix of the case was that the plaintiff instituted a suit in a District Court where she sought declaration stating that \u2018she was the lawful permit holder issued under the Land Development Ordinance\u2019 hence, she was lawfully entitled to the possession of the said land. Further ejectment of the defendant was also sought along with the recovery of damages. On the contrary, the defendant requested the plaintiff\u2019s suit to be dismissed as she was the original permit holder and sought a declaration in this regard. There was no dispute that it was the defendant who was in possession of the land at the time of the institution of the action. Plaintiff stated in her evidence that in 1974 the possession was transferred to a person in lieu of some money but after several years when the plaintiff checked she found the defendant in the possession. Defendant then admitted that the possession was transferred to her by the same person of whom the plaintiff was admitting to transfer.<\/p>\n

The crucial question decided by the District Court was \u2018whether the second Permit issued in favour of the Defendant was invalid and therefore the first Permit issued in favour of the Plaintiff was still valid.\u2019 After trial, the learned District Judge held, with the Plaintiff on those issues and entered judgment for the Plaintiff as prayed for in the prayer to the plaint. Hence, the defendant instituted an appeal against the judgment in favor of the plaintiff.<\/p>\n

The Court, observed that the District Court had committed several errors while passing the judgment such as, firstly the Divisional Secretary who issued a permit should have been made a party to the suit, as the evidence was important in that respect. Secondly, the District Court was not authorized to decide the validity of the second permit issued in favor of the defendant, such exercise was a blatant violation of the fundamental rule of natural justice of audi alteram partem. <\/em>The Court held that \u201cNo Court<\/em><\/strong> has the right to decide against a person who is not a party to the case and who has not been given a hearing<\/em><\/strong>.\u201d It was further held by the Court that the position taken up by the Plaintiff before the District Court that the Defendant\u2019s permit was issued pending the action was also, for the same reason, untenable. Hence, the Court favored the State and stated that the State was not bound by the judgment of the District Court.<\/p>\n

Another issue which was observed by the Court was that the District Court escaped the copy of permit which was tendered by the Plaintiff with the plaint was Ex-facie<\/strong> cancelled and an endorsement was made to the Divisional Secretary. Thus, the Plaintiff knew before filing the case that the Permit which she relied on to file this case was a cancelled Permit although she claimed a declaration from Court that she was the lawful Permit holder of the land. Then it was abundantly clear that the Plaintiff essentially sought the main relief against the Divisional Secretary although the Divisional Secretary was not made a party.<\/p>\n

It was observed that the District Court noted that the cancellation of the Plaintiff\u2019s permit was clearly proved to defeat the claim of the Plaintiff. Further, the decision of the Divisional Secretary was upheld and stated correctly by the Court as the Plaintiff had virtually sold the land to the third party in 1974 and quit the possession of the land thereafter voluntarily. Court held that as a blatant violation of one of the many conditions of the permit, which enabled the State to cancel the permit after the inquiry.<\/p>\n

The judgment passed by the District Court was set aside as the District Judge had placed great reliance on the receipt produced to say that the fine imposed on the Plaintiff for violation of a condition of the permit, namely, failure to occupy and possess the land, had been paid but on the one hand, there was no evidence that the receipt was produced by the Plaintiff at the inquiry and on the other hand, payment of the fine did not give authority to the Plaintiff to continue to violate the conditions of the permit. It was stated so in the letter itself. Admittedly, the Plaintiff had never gone into possession of the land after 1974.[Weerasinghe Hettige Stela v. H.M. Bala Manike, 2019 SCC OnLine SL CA 10<\/b><\/a>, decided on 02-09-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Court of Appeal of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka: Mahinda Samayawardhena, J. contemplated an appeal against the judgment passed by <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":147611,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,12],"tags":[37727,37442],"class_list":["post-219976","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-foreigncourts","tag-payment-of-fine","tag-suit-for-declaration"],"yoast_head":"\nSL CoA | Court cannot decide against a person who is not a party to the suit; Payment of fine did not give authority to Plaintiff to continue to violate the conditions of the permit in suit for declaration, appeal allowed | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"SL CoA | Court cannot decide against a person who is not a party to the suit; Payment of fine did not give authority to Plaintiff to continue to violate the conditions of the permit in suit for declaration, appeal allowed\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Court of Appeal of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka: Mahinda Samayawardhena, J. contemplated an appeal against the judgment passed by\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-09-25T10:00:56+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-10-11T09:31:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/\",\"name\":\"SL CoA | Court cannot decide against a person who is not a party to the suit; Payment of fine did not give authority to Plaintiff to continue to violate the conditions of the permit in suit for declaration, appeal allowed | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-09-25T10:00:56+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-10-11T09:31:27+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"SL CoA | Court cannot decide against a person who is not a party to the suit; Payment of fine did not give authority to Plaintiff to continue to violate the conditions of the permit in suit for declaration, appeal allowed\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"SL CoA | Court cannot decide against a person who is not a party to the suit; Payment of fine did not give authority to Plaintiff to continue to violate the conditions of the permit in suit for declaration, appeal allowed | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"SL CoA | Court cannot decide against a person who is not a party to the suit; Payment of fine did not give authority to Plaintiff to continue to violate the conditions of the permit in suit for declaration, appeal allowed","og_description":"Court of Appeal of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka: Mahinda Samayawardhena, J. contemplated an appeal against the judgment passed by","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-09-25T10:00:56+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-10-11T09:31:27+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/","name":"SL CoA | Court cannot decide against a person who is not a party to the suit; Payment of fine did not give authority to Plaintiff to continue to violate the conditions of the permit in suit for declaration, appeal allowed | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg","datePublished":"2019-09-25T10:00:56+00:00","dateModified":"2019-10-11T09:31:27+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/25\/sl-coa-court-cannot-decide-against-a-person-who-is-not-a-party-to-the-suit-payment-of-fine-did-not-give-authority-to-plaintiff-to-continue-to-violate-the-conditions-of-the-permit-in-suit-for-declar\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"SL CoA | Court cannot decide against a person who is not a party to the suit; Payment of fine did not give authority to Plaintiff to continue to violate the conditions of the permit in suit for declaration, appeal allowed"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":263180,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/05\/permanent-injunction-cant-be-granted-against-true-owner-once-the-title-dispute-is-settled-sc-reverses-three-concurrent-findings\/","url_meta":{"origin":219976,"position":0},"title":"Permanent Injunction can’t be granted against true owner once the title dispute is settled; SC reverses three concurrent findings\u00a0","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"March 5, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Reversing the concurrent findings of all the Court below in a case where the plaintiff was granted the relief of permanent injunction despite having lost the title, the bench of MR Shah* and BV Nagarathna, JJ has held that the plaintiff is not entitled to a relief of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Permanent-Injunction-cant-be-granted-against-true-owner-once-the-title-dispute-is-settled-Supreme-Court-reverses-three-concurrent-findings.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Permanent-Injunction-cant-be-granted-against-true-owner-once-the-title-dispute-is-settled-Supreme-Court-reverses-three-concurrent-findings.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Permanent-Injunction-cant-be-granted-against-true-owner-once-the-title-dispute-is-settled-Supreme-Court-reverses-three-concurrent-findings.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Permanent-Injunction-cant-be-granted-against-true-owner-once-the-title-dispute-is-settled-Supreme-Court-reverses-three-concurrent-findings.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Permanent-Injunction-cant-be-granted-against-true-owner-once-the-title-dispute-is-settled-Supreme-Court-reverses-three-concurrent-findings.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":271912,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/19\/it-is-not-for-the-court-to-decide-the-validity-of-the-allotment-of-land-by-the-government-tripura-high-court-dismisses-appeal-in-suit-for-recovery-of-possession-of-land\/","url_meta":{"origin":219976,"position":1},"title":"“It is not for the court to decide the validity of the allotment of land by the Government”; Tripura High Court dismisses appeal in suit for recovery of possession of land","author":"Editor","date":"August 19, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Tripura High Court: T. Amarnath Goud, J. dismissed a second appeal which was filed under section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 against the judgment which dismissed the appeal affirming the judgment passed by Civil Judge ( Senior Division) in connection with declaring the right, title & interest of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Tripura High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/tripura-high-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/tripura-high-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/tripura-high-court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/tripura-high-court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/tripura-high-court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":240810,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/17\/chh-hc-whether-transfer-sale-of-abadi-land-is-complete-without-delivery-of-possession-of-the-land-along-with-superstructure-in-favour-of-the-purchaser-hc-decides\/","url_meta":{"origin":219976,"position":2},"title":"Chh HC | Whether transfer\/sale of Abadi land is complete without delivery of possession of the land along with superstructure in favour of the purchaser? HC decides","author":"Editor","date":"December 17, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Chattisgarh High Court: Sanjay K Agrawal J., dismissed the second appeal being devoid of merits. The facts of the case are such that the plaintiff's father, Kanhaiya Kori (Defendant 2) purchased the suit property including suit land along with the kutcha house by registered sale deed from one Rajim Bai\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":223684,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/30\/sl-sc-no-relief-against-dispossession-by-bona-fide-purchaser-where-vendor-fails-to-show-retention-of-beneficial-interest\/","url_meta":{"origin":219976,"position":3},"title":"SL SC | No relief against dispossession by bona fide purchaser\u00a0where vendor fails to show retention of beneficial interest","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 30, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka: A Full Bench of Sisira J. de Abrew, L.T.B. Dehideniya and Murdu N.B. Fernando, JJ., dismissed an appeal which was filed before the Court aggrieved by the judgment dated 17-09-2010 of the Civil Appellate High Court which had upheld the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Supreme-Court-of-Sri-Lanka.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":219189,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/06\/ori-hc-prolong-possession-of-property-acquired-by-adverse-possession-shall-not-amount-to-ownership\/","url_meta":{"origin":219976,"position":4},"title":"Ori HC | Prolong possession of property, acquired by adverse possession, shall not amount to ownership","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 6, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Orissa High Court: Dr A.K. Rath, J. dismissed an appeal seeking to reverse a judgment relating to suit for declaration. In the present facts of the case, the suit property was jointly recorded in the names of three cousin brothers, wherein the Odisha Record of Rights (ROR) had been published.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":270881,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/30\/when-does-a-will-becomes-a-suspicious-document-madhya-pradesh-high-court-answers\/","url_meta":{"origin":219976,"position":5},"title":"When does a Will becomes a suspicious document? Madhya Pradesh High Court answers","author":"Editor","date":"July 30, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Madhya Pradesh High Court: Dwarka Dhish Bansal, J., while dismissing a second appeal held that in presence of prior execution of agreement of Gift, the Will becomes a suspicious document. The factual matrix of the case was that the land in question belonged to a deceased-Vindeshwari Prasad. It\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madhya Pradesh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/219976","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=219976"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/219976\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/147611"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=219976"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=219976"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=219976"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}