- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- Suit For Declaration Must Be Filed...
Suit For Declaration Must Be Filed Where Property Title Is In Dispute, Not Suit For Perpetual Injunction : Andhra Pradesh High Court
Jagriti Sanghi
14 March 2022 1:34 PM GMT
In a recent case, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that where the title of a property is in dispute, the parties concerned must file a suit for declaration and not a suit for perpetual injunction simplicitor."Though question of title would be incidentally go into in a suit filed for injunction, when the adversary parties are claiming the schedule property under registered documents...
In a recent case, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that where the title of a property is in dispute, the parties concerned must file a suit for declaration and not a suit for perpetual injunction simplicitor.
"Though question of title would be incidentally go into in a suit filed for injunction, when the adversary parties are claiming the schedule property under registered documents the plaintiffs ought to have filed suit for declaration. Complicated question of title will not be determined in a suit for perpetual injunction. Court would only concerned possession of the plaintiffs on the date of filing of the suit," Justice Subba Reddy Satti held.
The observation was made in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in Anathula Sudhakar Vs. P. Buchi Reddy (Dead) by LRs. and Ors. 2008. It was held therein,
"Where there is merely an interference with plaintiff's lawful possession or threat of dispossession, it is sufficient to sue for an injunction simpliciter...But a finding on title cannot be recorded in a suit for injunction, unless there are necessary pleadings and appropriate issue regarding title."
Brief Facts of the case
The plaintiffs filed the suit seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their men from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property. It was submitted in the plaint that the schedule properties are joint family property of plaintiffs and the same were purchased under registered sale deeds and the plaintiffs are in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the same. The defendants without any manner of right were trying to invade into the plaint schedule properties.
The defendants filed written statement and denied the title of plaintiffs. The defendants contended that they had been enjoying the land with absolute rights by paying land revenue to the Government; that the authorities also issued pattadar pass books in favour of the defendants.
The unsuccessful plaintiff filed the second appeal. The counsel for plaintiff contended that the judgments of the courts below vitiated in not granting injunction.
Observations of the Court
In view of the denial by defendants, since the denial was not for the sake of denial, the plaintiffs ought to have filed suit for declaration instead of injunction simplicitor. When the adversary parties claim the schedule property under registered documents the plaintiffs ought to have filed for declaration. Complicated question of title would not be determined in a suit for perpetual injunction.
The perusal of documents filed by the plaintiffs prima facie did not establish possession over the scheduled property on the day of filing the suit, which was the sine qua non in a suit filed for perpetual injunction.
The court relied on the Supreme Court decision in Anathula Sudhakar (supra) in which the following observations were made:
"Where the averments regarding title are absent in a plaint and where there is no issue relating to title, the court will not investigate or examine or render a finding on a question of title, in a suit for injunction. Even where there are necessary pleadings and issue, if the matter involves complicated questions of fact and law relating to title, the court will relegate the parties to the remedy by way of comprehensive suit for declaration of title, instead of deciding the issue in a suit for mere injunction."
The suit for injunction simplicitor in the facts of case was not maintainable without seeking for declaration of title. Therefore, the second appeal was dismissed.
Cause Title: Karukola Vasudevarao v. Karri Suseelamma & ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AP) 28
