Case Note & Summary
The appellants, who were the plaintiffs in the trial court, filed Special Civil Suit No. 54 of 2012 seeking a declaration of ownership and permanent injunction in respect of suit property bearing Khata No. 42, Survey No.8, Sub Division 1, 20, 7, 22, 53 and 10/1 of Village Chinchpada, Dadra and Nagar Haveli. They claimed that the property was granted to Babi Devji Dhinda, Bhikal Devji Dhinda, Baban Devji Dhinda, Dhakal Devji Dhinda and Lakhama Devji Dhinda under Order No. LRO-II/Chinchpada/37/50/57/74 dated 13.2.1976 issued under Section 4 of the Dadra and Nagar Haveli Land Reforms Regulation, 1971. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants, who were the legal heirs of Babi Devji Dhinda, were trying to dispossess them. The defendants filed a written statement admitting the plaintiffs' title and possession but did not appear at trial. The trial court dismissed the suit on the ground that the plaintiffs failed to prove their title and possession. On appeal, the High Court held that the trial court erred in ignoring the admission in the written statement and the revenue records. The court noted that the defendants had admitted the plaintiffs' title and possession, and the plaintiffs had produced the grant order and revenue entries. Therefore, the burden of proof was discharged. The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the trial court's judgment, and decreed the suit as prayed.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Burden of Proof - Title and Possession - In a suit for declaration of ownership and injunction, the plaintiff must prove title and possession. However, when the defendant does not contest and there is an admission in the written statement, the burden is discharged. (Paras 6-8) B) Land Law - Dadra and Nagar Haveli Land Reforms Regulation, 1971 - Section 4 - Grant of Land - The order under Section 4 of the Regulation granting land to the plaintiffs' predecessors is a relevant document to prove title. (Para 5) C) Evidence Act, 1872 - Admission - Non-contesting Defendant - An admission in the written statement, even if the defendant does not appear, can be used against the defendant. The court can pass a decree based on such admission. (Paras 7-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the plaintiffs have proved their title and possession over the suit property to be entitled to a decree of declaration and permanent injunction.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and decree dated 30.08.2017 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Silvassa in Special Civil Suit No. 54 of 2012, and decreed the suit in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). The court directed that the decree be drawn up accordingly.
Law Points
- Burden of proof in civil suits
- Title based on revenue records
- Admission by non-contesting defendant
- Section 4 of Dadra and Nagar Haveli Land Reforms Regulation
- 1971
