Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, who were defendants in a civil suit, challenged the concurrent decrees of the trial court and first appellate court which decreed the suit for possession and mesne profits in favor of the respondents. The suit property was a piece of land with a house. The respondents claimed ownership based on registered sale deeds executed in their favor by the original owner. The petitioners contended that they were in possession as owners and that the sale deeds were not binding on them. The trial court, after considering the evidence, held that the respondents had proved their title and that the petitioners were in wrongful possession. The first appellate court affirmed the findings. The High Court, in the writ petition under Article 227, examined the scope of its jurisdiction and found that the concurrent findings were based on evidence and were not perverse. The court noted that the petitioners failed to produce any documentary evidence to support their claim of ownership. The court also upheld the award of mesne profits at Rs. 5000/- per year. The writ petition was dismissed with costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Concurrent Findings of Fact - Scope of Article 227 - The High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India does not act as a court of appeal and cannot re-appreciate evidence to substitute its own findings unless the findings are perverse or based on no evidence. The court held that the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below were based on proper appreciation of evidence and did not warrant interference. (Paras 1-10) B) Property Law - Suit for Possession - Title and Possession - In a suit for possession based on title, the plaintiff must prove title and that the defendant is in wrongful possession. The court held that the respondents (plaintiffs) successfully proved their title through sale deeds and that the petitioners (defendants) failed to establish any right or title over the suit property. (Paras 5-8) C) Mesne Profits - Determination - The court upheld the award of mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 5000/- per year from the date of suit till delivery of possession, as the respondents proved the letting value of the property. (Para 9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India should interfere with concurrent findings of fact recorded by the trial court and first appellate court in a suit for possession and mesne profits.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed with costs. The concurrent findings of the courts below are upheld.
Law Points
- Concurrent findings of fact
- Scope of Article 227
- Suit for possession
- Mesne profits
- Burden of proof
- Title and possession
