High Court's reversal of mandatory injunction decrees deemed unsustainable by Supreme Court; matter remanded for fresh consideration.
In a significant legal development, the Supreme Court of India has overturned a Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment that reversed decrees for mandatory injunctions issued by a Trial Court and upheld by the first Appellate Court. The case, involving the removal of alleged illegal encroachments by S D Adarsh Jain Kanya Maha Vidyalaya Sadhaura, highlights crucial procedural principles regarding substantial questions of law and the imposition of monetary compensation without the consent of plaintiffs or their legal heirs.
The appellants, legal heirs of the original plaintiff Om Parkash, contested the encroachment by the defendants, which allegedly obstructed their property rights. The Trial Court initially decreed the removal of the encroachment and was upheld by the first Appellate Court. However, the High Court later reversed these decrees, opting instead to direct monetary compensation to the plaintiffs, a decision made without their consent or any substantial questions of law being framed.
The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices S.V.N. Bhatti and Atul S. Chandurkar, found the High Court's actions to be procedurally flawed. The High Court's directive to assess monetary compensation was not supported by any decree and was deemed contrary to procedural law. The Supreme Court emphasized that the High Court erred by not addressing any substantial questions of law and by making new prayers not sought by the original plaintiff.
Justice Atul S. Chandurkar, delivering the judgment, highlighted that the High Court's direction to compensate the plaintiffs monetarily, without their consent, constituted a miscarriage of justice. The judgment noted that the High Court repeated the same mistake even after a previous remand by the Supreme Court for reconsideration.
Concluding the judgment, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's decision and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. The High Court has been urged to adjudicate the appeals in accordance with Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, and address the substantial questions of law.
The Supreme Court's decision underscores the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and respecting the original reliefs sought by plaintiffs in property disputes. The case now returns to the High Court for expedited reconsideration, given its prolonged pendency since 2008.
Statutory provision(s):
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order XXI, Section 100
Rajat Kumar v. S D Adarsh Jain Kanya Maha Vidyalaya Sadhaura, (SC) : Law Finder Doc id # 2926842
