Madan Lal Vs. Kabal Singh and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

.....of a person governed by customary law and constitutional validity of section 14 of hindu succession act. thus there is no real conflict between the two full bench judgments. both the full bench judgments have been delivered on the assumption that joginder singhs case dealt with question of alienation whereas pritam singhs case had decided the question concerning succession. even on fact in joginder singhs case the issue was validity of alienation by consent decree by a father to his two sons, which was challenged by third son, whereas in pritam singhs case the question of nature of property in hands of sons on death of their father had arisen for purposes of assessment of estate duty. in pritam singhs case the property in the hands of the sons was held to be coparcenary property and only 1/3rd of property belonging to deceased father was considered eligible for estate duty. therefore, there was no question of alienation in pritam singhs case......civil judge (sd) patti. by this order the learned additional civil judge has allowed the application filed by the respondent-plaintiff under order 6 rule 17 read with section 151 c.p.c. it may be noted here that the amendment sought by the plaintiff was to the effect that in the alternative the plaintiff was entitled to the damages of rs. 1 lac if the possession of the land in dispute is not delivered to him.2. the only point raised by the learned counsel of the petitioner is that the alternative plea raised by the plaintiff for the recovery of rs. 1 lac as damages is time barred and as such the amendment incorporating this relief which is lime barred, is not permissible. in support of this submission the learned counsel has placed reliance on a judgment of the supreme court in t.l. muddu krishana and anr. v. smt. lalitha ram chandra rao, j.t. 1997(1) s.c. 540.3. mr. sandhu, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, however, submits that the plea raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is squarely covered against him by a judgment of this court in randhir singh v. ajit singh, 1992 p.l.j. 412. after hearing the learned counsel for the parties and.....

Judgment:

ORDER

Sat Pal, J.

1. This petition has been filed against the order dated 11.8.1997 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (SD) Patti. By this order the learned Additional Civil Judge has allowed the application filed by the respondent-plaintiff under order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 C.P.C. It may be noted here that the amendment sought by the plaintiff was to the effect that in the alternative the plaintiff was entitled to the damages of Rs. 1 lac if the possession of the land in dispute is not delivered to him.

2. The only point raised by the learned counsel of the petitioner is that the alternative plea raised by the plaintiff for the recovery of Rs. 1 lac as damages is time barred and as such the amendment incorporating this relief which is lime barred, is not permissible. In support of this submission the learned counsel has placed reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court in T.L. Muddu Krishana and Anr. v. Smt. Lalitha Ram Chandra Rao, J.T. 1997(1) S.C. 540.

3. Mr. Sandhu, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, however, submits that the plea raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is squarely covered against him by a judgment of this court in Randhir Singh v. Ajit Singh, 1992 P.L.J. 412. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the impugned order, I am of the opinion that there is no merit in this petition. As held by this Court in the case of Randhir Singh (supra) in a case where the relief of possession of land has been sought, the alternative relief claiming the amount of damages against he land in dispute, is permissible even if the alternative relief has been claimed after the expiry of the period of limitation. With respect, I am in full agreement with the judgment of this court in the case of Randhir Singh (supra). Accordingly, the. petition is dismissed with no orders as to costs.