Suit for partition by mother against her son for her husband’s property after his death in to two equal shares – son produced will deed – claimed entire property – suit dismissed – High court set aside the trial court order and found that the Will Deed is no genuine – Pending appeal – Grand Son impleaded basing on will deed in the place of mother – High court impleaded basing on Will- but left open about the prove of Will by separate proceedings – Apex court confirmed the same.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1046 OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP (C) … Continue reading Suit for partition by mother against her son for her husband’s property after his death in to two equal shares – son produced will deed – claimed entire property – suit dismissed – High court set aside the trial court order and found that the Will Deed is no genuine – Pending appeal – Grand Son impleaded basing on will deed in the place of mother – High court impleaded basing on Will- but left open about the prove of Will by separate proceedings – Apex court confirmed the same.

What needs to be stated is that the learned trial Judge passed an order in the order sheet that recorded that the accused persons had been acquitted as per the judgment separately typed, signed and dated. = Mistakes made or errors committed are to be rectified by the appellate court in exercise of “error jurisdiction”. That is a different matter. But, when a situation like the present one crops up, it causes agony, an unbearable one, to the cause of justice and hits like a lightning in a cloudless sky. It hurts the justice dispensation system and no one, and we mean no one, has any right to do so.

Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 32-33 OF 2017 (@ S.L.P. (Crl.) Nos. … Continue reading What needs to be stated is that the learned trial Judge passed an order in the order sheet that recorded that the accused persons had been acquitted as per the judgment separately typed, signed and dated. = Mistakes made or errors committed are to be rectified by the appellate court in exercise of “error jurisdiction”. That is a different matter. But, when a situation like the present one crops up, it causes agony, an unbearable one, to the cause of justice and hits like a lightning in a cloudless sky. It hurts the justice dispensation system and no one, and we mean no one, has any right to do so.

Misapplication of apex court Nar Singh’s case- judgment – Remand applies only when the accused questioned prejudice due to non following of procedure in trial court – but not suo moto – In our view, the High Court has not properly appreciated Nar Singh’s case where this Court laid down that the appellate court can order for fresh trial from the stage of examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C., only in cases where failure to question the accused on certain incriminating evidence has resulted in serious prejudice to the accused. The High Court, in our view, has not properly appreciated the ratio laid down in Nar Singh’s case and erred in applying the same to the present case. – When the accused prefers an appeal against their conviction and sentence, the appellate court is duty bound to consider the evidence on record and independently arrive at a conclusion. In our considered view, the High Court erred in remitting the matter back to the trial court for fresh trial and the impugned order cannot be sustained.

CRL. APPEAL NOS. 119-122 OF 2017 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 119-122 … Continue reading Misapplication of apex court Nar Singh’s case- judgment – Remand applies only when the accused questioned prejudice due to non following of procedure in trial court – but not suo moto – In our view, the High Court has not properly appreciated Nar Singh’s case where this Court laid down that the appellate court can order for fresh trial from the stage of examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C., only in cases where failure to question the accused on certain incriminating evidence has resulted in serious prejudice to the accused. The High Court, in our view, has not properly appreciated the ratio laid down in Nar Singh’s case and erred in applying the same to the present case. – When the accused prefers an appeal against their conviction and sentence, the appellate court is duty bound to consider the evidence on record and independently arrive at a conclusion. In our considered view, the High Court erred in remitting the matter back to the trial court for fresh trial and the impugned order cannot be sustained.

the High Court affirmed the order passed by the Collector, Haridwar on 12 May 2003 holding that the property in dispute stands vested in the government under Section 29 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. This finding has been premised on the basis that there exists no heir to succeed to the property following the death of Mohan Lal. = Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, sec. “167 (1). The following consequences shall ensue in respect of every transfer which is void by virtue of Section 166, namely- (a) the subject-matter of transfer shall, with effect from the date of transfer, be deemed to have vested in the State Government free from all encumbrances; (b) the trees, crops and wells existing on the land on the date of transfer shall, with effect from the said date, be deemed to have vested in the State Government free from all encumbrances; and (c) the transferee may remove other moveable property or the materials of any immovable property existing on such land on the date of transfer within such time as may be prescribed.”- “167 (2). Where any land or other property has vested in the State Government under sub section (1) it shall be lawful for the Collector to take over possession over such or other property and to direct that any person occupying such land or other property be evicted therefrom. From the purposes of taking over such possession or evicting such unauthorised occupants, the Collector may use or cause to be used such force as may be necessary.” =The power conferred upon the Collector by Sub-section 2 of Section 167 can be exercised only in the circumstances set out in Sub-Section 1. In the present case, the provision was clearly not attracted.

1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No. 3878 OF 2009 KUTCHI LAL RAMESHWAR … Continue reading the High Court affirmed the order passed by the Collector, Haridwar on 12 May 2003 holding that the property in dispute stands vested in the government under Section 29 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. This finding has been premised on the basis that there exists no heir to succeed to the property following the death of Mohan Lal. = Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, sec. “167 (1). The following consequences shall ensue in respect of every transfer which is void by virtue of Section 166, namely- (a) the subject-matter of transfer shall, with effect from the date of transfer, be deemed to have vested in the State Government free from all encumbrances; (b) the trees, crops and wells existing on the land on the date of transfer shall, with effect from the said date, be deemed to have vested in the State Government free from all encumbrances; and (c) the transferee may remove other moveable property or the materials of any immovable property existing on such land on the date of transfer within such time as may be prescribed.”- “167 (2). Where any land or other property has vested in the State Government under sub section (1) it shall be lawful for the Collector to take over possession over such or other property and to direct that any person occupying such land or other property be evicted therefrom. From the purposes of taking over such possession or evicting such unauthorised occupants, the Collector may use or cause to be used such force as may be necessary.” =The power conferred upon the Collector by Sub-section 2 of Section 167 can be exercised only in the circumstances set out in Sub-Section 1. In the present case, the provision was clearly not attracted.