Supreme Court of India

KALYANversusGORAKH

Citation: 1995 INSC 891
Decided: 13 December 1995
Disposal: Disposed off
Bench: K RAMASWAMYB L HANSARIA

Holding

The appellant may continue in possession of the land subject to an annual deposit of Rs 10,000 until the suit is disposed, refundable with interest if the respondent succeeds.

Summary

The appellant purchased agricultural land from the erstwhile landlord, who was a protected tenant under the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1950. The respondent, the protected tenant, filed a suit claiming rights over the land. The High Court appointed a receiver and ordered the appellant to deposit a sum as security. On appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed the High Court's finding that the appellant was in possession, but modified the relief, directing that the appellant may continue possession provided he deposits Rs 10,000 annually from 1991 until the suit is finally decided. The deposited amount, along with accrued interest, would be payable to the respondent if he succeeds in the suit. The Court also directed the trial court to keep the deposits in a nationalised bank and to dispose of the matter expeditiously. The appeal was disposed of without costs.

Issues considered

Whether a protected tenant under the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1950, can enforce a claim over land sold by the landlord to a purchaser.
Whether the purchaser may retain possession of the land pending determination of the suit.
Whether the appointment of a receiver and the imposition of a monetary security are appropriate remedies.

Subjects

protected tenanttenancy lawland salepossessionreceiversecurity depositcivil appealHyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act

Judgment

                                  KALYAN                                        A
                                      v.
                                 GORAKH

                           DECEMBER 13, 1995

             [K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.]                              B

        Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1950 :

      Ss.2(c), 2(r) & 34-Agricultural land-f'urcliased from erstwhile
landlord-Protected tenant-Claim over land sold by landlord-Purchaser in
possession-Held, purchaser to deposit Rs. 10,000-Every year till disposal of    C
suit-ln the event of tenant succeeding, he would be emitted to wiOidraw the
an1ount.

      In a revision petition arising out of a suit between the appellant, the
purchaser of the land in dispute from the erstwhile landlord, and the           D
respondent, a protected tenant under the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricul-
tural Land Act, 1950, the High Court directed appointment of a receiver
in respect of the suit land. Aggrieved, the purchaser filed the appeal.

        Disposing of the appeal, this Court
                                                                                E
      HELD : In view of the finding of the High Court that the appellant
is in possession of the land, it would be in the interest of justice that
appellant continues in possession but deposits a sum of Rs. 10,000 every
year from 1991 onwards till the disposal of the suit. In the event of the
respondent succeeding in the suit, he would be entitled to withdraw the
amount with interest accrued thereon. [660-C-D]                                 F
        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 12055 of
1995.

     From the Judgment and Order dated 11.3.93 of the Bombay High
Court in C.R.P. No. 'lJ',7 of 1993.                                             G
        Subrat Birla and S.C. Birla for the Appellants.

        B.Y. Kulkarni for the Respondent.

        The following Order of the Court was delivered :                        H
                                    659
    . 660                    SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R.

A           Leave granted.

         Having heard the counsel on both sides, we are satisfied that there
  is no need to disturb the findings recorded by the High Court. However,
  the High Court having found the appellant in possession of the land after
  he had purchased the property from the erstwhile landlord of the respon-
B dent, a protected tenant under the provisions of the Hyderabad Tenancy
  And Agricultural Land Act, 1950; and so, needed some protection, it
  directed appointment of receiver. In view of the finding that the appellant
  is in possession, we feel that in the interest of justice, the appellant would
  continue in possession but should deposit a sum of Rs. 10,000 every year
C from the year 1991 onwards to the credit of the suit and keep depositing
  the same till the disposal of the suit etc. In the event of the respondent
  succeeding in the suit, he is entitled to withdraw the same. As soon as the
  appellant shall deposit the arrears as on date within a period of three
  months from today and before 31st January of each year, the trial court is
  directed to keep that amount in interest yielding deposit securities in a
D nationalised Bank. In the event of the respondent's succeeding, he would
  be entitled to withdraw the amount with interest accrued thereon. The trial
  court is directed to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible
  preferably within a period of six months from the date of the receipt of this
  order.
E
          The appeal is accordingly disposed of in terms of the above order.
     No costs.

     R.P.                                                  Appeal disposed of.

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "protected tenant"Sign in to search