Ajitsinh C. Gaekwad & Ors. Vs. Dileepsinh D. Gaekwad & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 1520 of 1973.
Petitioner: Ajitsinh C. Gaekwad & Ors.
Respondent: Dileepsinh D. Gaekwad & Ors.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 1520 of 1973.
Judges: M.P.THAKKAR & B.C.RAY, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Mar 03, 1987
Head Note:
CIVIL SUIT
Award of compensation on the abolition of tenure in respect of which name of predecessor-in-interest of appellants is recorded – Respondent laying his claim to the amount – Who should file the suit? Respondent to approach the civil court to establish his right to the compensation amount.
JUDGEMENT:
O R D E R
1 Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the judgments of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal and the High Court we are of the opinion that the view taken by the High Court which is a plausible view cannot be faulted. We see no good reason to unsettle the law which has been settled by the High Court as early as in 1973. We accordingly confirm the decision of the High Court subject to modification to the following extent:-
2. The High Court has directed the parties to approach the Civil Court in order to get the questions decided by the civil court. We are of the opinion that since it is respondent no.1 who is laying a claim to the amount which has been awarded on the abolition of the tenure in respect of which the name of predecessor-in-interest of appellants is recorded it is for respondent no.1 to approach the civil court in order to establish such right as is claimed by him and that the appellants should not be obliged to file a suit. It will be open to respondent no.1 to institute a suit in order to establish his right, if any, in respect of the compensation amount latest by July 15, 1987. If respondent no.1 institutes such a suit, the intervening period will be treated as having been occupied in prosecuting the matter in good faith and no question of limitation will be permitted to be raised. In case respondent no.1 does not file a suit by July 15, 1987, the authority before whom the amount is lying will make over the amount of compensation to the appellants. If on the other hand, such a suit is filed the trial court will permit the appellants to withdraw the amount on furnishing sufficient bank guarantee to cover the unpaid amount along with interest after hearing the parties. The learned Judge will ensure that respondent no.1 is properly protected and in case he succeeds he is able to reap the fruits of litigation by ensuring that the bank guarantee is for the proper amount.
3. The appeal is dismissed of accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.
1 Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the judgments of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal and the High Court we are of the opinion that the view taken by the High Court which is a plausible view cannot be faulted. We see no good reason to unsettle the law which has been settled by the High Court as early as in 1973. We accordingly confirm the decision of the High Court subject to modification to the following extent:-
2. The High Court has directed the parties to approach the Civil Court in order to get the questions decided by the civil court. We are of the opinion that since it is respondent no.1 who is laying a claim to the amount which has been awarded on the abolition of the tenure in respect of which the name of predecessor-in-interest of appellants is recorded it is for respondent no.1 to approach the civil court in order to establish such right as is claimed by him and that the appellants should not be obliged to file a suit. It will be open to respondent no.1 to institute a suit in order to establish his right, if any, in respect of the compensation amount latest by July 15, 1987. If respondent no.1 institutes such a suit, the intervening period will be treated as having been occupied in prosecuting the matter in good faith and no question of limitation will be permitted to be raised. In case respondent no.1 does not file a suit by July 15, 1987, the authority before whom the amount is lying will make over the amount of compensation to the appellants. If on the other hand, such a suit is filed the trial court will permit the appellants to withdraw the amount on furnishing sufficient bank guarantee to cover the unpaid amount along with interest after hearing the parties. The learned Judge will ensure that respondent no.1 is properly protected and in case he succeeds he is able to reap the fruits of litigation by ensuring that the bank guarantee is for the proper amount.
3. The appeal is dismissed of accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.
