HC pulls up Defence ministry for forcible possession of century-old disputed property
Indore, The Madhya Pradesh High Court has criticised the Defence Ministry for its 'wholly illegal' act of forcibly taking possession of a 132-year-old disputed property from two elderly sisters without adhering to due legal procedures.
In an order of May 13, the Indore Bench of the High Court presided by Justice Pranay Verma said the manner in which the defence estate officer seized the approximately 1.8-acre property situated in MHOW, Indore, 'defies all canons of law'.
The order came in an appeal filed by Ann Chandiramani, 84, and Aruna Rodrigues, 79, who were challenging an April 2024 order from an appellate court that had rejected their plea for an injunction against dispossession.
As per the plea, a civil court in 2022 had rejected the application seeking declaration of their title over the disputed property and also a declaration that the show cause notice for eviction issued to them by the defence estate officer was null and void.
While the civil court acknowledged the sisters' failure to prove their title, it recognised their possession of the property and their right to its occupation.
A day after the civil court rejected their application, the defence estate officer took possession of the property without following due process of law and without any order of eviction passed by a court or authority, the sisters alleged.
The High Court's judgment took note of the "forcible possession" that occurred within a mere 24 hours of the civil court's decision.
"It is evident that the defendants did not afford a breathing time of even 24 hours to the plaintiffs to approach the appellate court and seek interim order in their favour," the HC observed.
The bench highlighted the long-standing nature of the property dispute, spanning nearly 30 years, and said "heavens would not have fallen" had the sisters been granted reasonable time to seek legal recourse.
"The manner in which the defendants have taken possession of the disputed property is wholly illegal and defies all canons of law," the HC remarked.
It is evident that the defence estate officer was "bent up and premeditated" to deprive the sisters of appealing against the trial court order, Justice Verma said.
"Such an attitude on part of the defendants is most unfortunate and cannot be countenanced," HC said.
The bench directed the defence estate officer to restore status quo and deliver possession of the disputed property to the sisters and thereafter not to interfere with the same or create any third-party interest.
In their plea, the sisters claimed that the property was purchased by their predecessors in November 1892.
In July 1995, the Defence ministry issued a notice to the sisters under the provisions of Public Premises Act, seeking documents of title of the disputed property.
They were also directed to stop construction on the property and were issued a show cause notice for eviction by the Defence Estate Officer.
The sisters replied to the notice and in 1997, filed a suit in the civil court.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
7 hours ago
- Time of India
Sex harassment FIR lodged against sports head, HC told
Mumbai: The state on Friday informed Bombay high court that Kherwadi police station, Bandra East, registered an FIR against the president of a sports body on a complaint of sexual harassment by a woman athlete. The FIR followed Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Neela Gokhale's direction on Wednesday to the police-in-charge to record her statement and "take appropriate action in accordance with the law, including registration of FIR, against Mr... and others found involved, if a cognisable offence is made out against them". The state's advocate, Vishal Thadani, informed that an FIR was registered on Thursday. The HC was hearing a petition by Mixed Martial Arts India to direct the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) to grant it recognition. Since the IOA granted recognition to the Mixed Martial Arts Sports Federation of India, the Asian Mixed Martial Arts Association recognised only it. In these circumstances, the petitioner's athletes are unable to participate in the first Asian Youth Championship in Bahrain between June 25 and 28. The rival federation submitted documents, including screenshots of Instagram texts between the petitioner's president and an athlete. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo "A plain reading of the messages demonstrates sexual overtures being made by Mr... to the said woman athlete," the judges noted. They noticed a woman crying in court. Federation advocate Adil Parsurampuria said she was "the athlete concerned". The judges said "she had a story to tell. The woman athlete informed us she was being sexually harassed and suffered great anguish at the hands of Mr... She was compelled to reply to his Instagram and WhatsApp messages, and if she refused, she was threatened she would not be permitted to participate in any sport..." The woman complained to various authorities with proof of harassment, "but her every attempt was thwarted, and she was left to run from pillar to post for redressal of her grievance". The judges were "shocked" to hear her statements, adding it is "extremely unfortunate" that neither the petitioner, federation or IOA stood by the woman nor have taken steps "to provide succour to her". The petitioner's advocate, Abhishek Upadhyay, said the president shall "step down from his position". "We accept the said statement as an undertaking given to this court," the judges said. To the judge's query, advocates Sanjeev Sawant and Heramb Kadam informed that IOA has a POSH (Prevention of Sexual Harassment) committee in place, and if a complaint is received, it would take action. Parsurampuria said in national interest, the federation shall select 5 athletes of the petitioner to participate in the championship. On Friday, judges refused to expunge observations against the president.
The Hindu
11 hours ago
- The Hindu
Police can't barge into houses of history-sheeters under guise of surveillance: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has held that the police have no right to knock on the doors of suspected persons or history-sheeters or 'barge' into their houses at night under the guise of surveillance. The ruling by Justice V.G. Arun came on a plea by a man accused of threatening police officers from discharging their duties when they asked him to come out of his house late at night as part of night check on rowdy history sheeters. Allowing the plea, the court quashed the FIR against the man and all further proceedings in connection with it, saying that 'under the guise of surveillance, the police cannot knock on the doors or barge into the houses of history sheeters'. The court said that police officers should understand that the concept of home 'transcends its physical manifestation as a dwelling and encompasses a rich tapestry of existential, emotional and social dimensions'. 'In other words, every man's house is his castle or temple, the sanctity of which cannot be vilified by knocking on the door at odd hours. A person's right to life encompasses the right to live with dignity and dignity is non-negotiable,' it said. The court further said that under the Kerala Police Manual only 'informal watching' of history sheeters and 'close watch' over those leading criminal existence were permitted. 'Undoubtedly, neither of those expressions permit domicile visits at night,' it added. It also pointed out that under section 39 of the Kerala Police Act all persons are bound to comply with the 'lawful directions' of a police officer for discharge of his functions. 'Knocking on the doors of a history sheeter at midnight and demanding him to come out of the house cannot by any stretch of imagination be termed as a lawful direction,' the court said. Consequently, the petitioner cannot be prosecuted for the offence of threatening a police officer to obstruct him from discharging his duties under the Kerala Police Act for refusing to abide by the direction to come out of the house at night, the court added. 'If, as alleged, the petitioner had used derogatory language or threatened the police during the course of such refusal, his action may invite some other offence, but definitely not the offence he is presently charged with,' it said. The petitioner had claimed that he was implicated in the case to divert the enquiry ordered by the High Court into his complaint alleging police harassment. The police had claimed that as part of their night check duty on rowdy history sheeters, officers had gone to ascertain if the petitioner was at home. However, when he was asked to open the door of his home, he refused to do so and also abused and intimidated the officer, it had alleged.
Time of India
12 hours ago
- Time of India
Ensure trader can access his shop and conduct business: Gujarat HC
Ahmedabad: The Gujarat high court directed the state authorities to "redress" the problem faced by a Muslim trader in conducting business from his legally owned shop in a Hindu-majority locality in Vadodara city. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The complainant has allegedly faced relentless obstruction from locals, who refuse to let him open the premises. The HC reminded the state govt that maintaining law and order is its duty. Onali Dholkawala had legally purchased the shop from two Hindu brothers near Champaner Darwaza in 2016. However, he could get the sale deed registered only in 2020 after he approached the HC as the area is covered under the Gujarat Prohibition of Transfer of Immovable Property and Provisions of Tenants from Eviction from Premises in Disturbed Areas Act, 1991 (Disturbed Areas Act), which restricts property transactions and mandates the district collector's permission for transactions. He continued to face opposition from the neighbourhood, as a couple of the residents challenged the sale to a Muslim and demanded its cancellation, claiming that allowing a Muslim to buy property in the area could lead to polarisation and disturb demographic equilibrium. In Feb 2023, the HC rejected their petition and imposed a fine of Rs 25,000 on each of the two litigants by terming such an objection as a "disturbing factor" because the owner "is being hounded and thwarting his attempt to enjoy the fruits of the property which he successfully purchased". An appeal against this order was dismissed as well. However, the locals still did not allow Dholkawala to use the shop. They allegedly dumped debris at the shop's gate so that it could not be opened. He approached the HC once again seeking police protection so that he could get the shop's building repaired and conduct business from the premises. He complained that he had approached Panigate police multiple times requesting protection but allegedly received no support After hearing his case, Justice H D Suthar stated, "In view of the facts of the case and looking to the grievance of the petitioner at Annexure-A, the respondent authority concerned is hereby directed to redress the grievance of the petitioner in accordance with law as it is the duty of the state to maintain the law and order. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now If any adverse outcome is there, the petitioners are at liberty to file appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum. " Ahmedabad: The Gujarat high court directed the state authorities to "redress" the problem faced by a Muslim trader in conducting business from his legally owned shop in a Hindu-majority locality in Vadodara city. The complainant has allegedly faced relentless obstruction from locals, who refuse to let him open the premises. The HC reminded the state govt that maintaining law and order is its duty. Onali Dholkawala had legally purchased the shop from two Hindu brothers near Champaner Darwaza in 2016. However, he could get the sale deed registered only in 2020 after he approached the HC as the area is covered under the Gujarat Prohibition of Transfer of Immovable Property and Provisions of Tenants from Eviction from Premises in Disturbed Areas Act, 1991 (Disturbed Areas Act), which restricts property transactions and mandates the district collector's permission for transactions. He continued to face opposition from the neighbourhood, as a couple of the residents challenged the sale to a Muslim and demanded its cancellation, claiming that allowing a Muslim to buy property in the area could lead to polarisation and disturb demographic equilibrium. In Feb 2023, the HC rejected their petition and imposed a fine of Rs 25,000 on each of the two litigants by terming such an objection as a "disturbing factor" because the owner "is being hounded and thwarting his attempt to enjoy the fruits of the property which he successfully purchased". An appeal against this order was dismissed as well. However, the locals still did not allow Dholkawala to use the shop. They allegedly dumped debris at the shop's gate so that it could not be opened. He approached the HC once again seeking police protection so that he could get the shop's building repaired and conduct business from the premises. He complained that he had approached Panigate police multiple times requesting protection but allegedly received no support After hearing his case, Justice H D Suthar stated, "In view of the facts of the case and looking to the grievance of the petitioner at Annexure-A, the respondent authority concerned is hereby directed to redress the grievance of the petitioner in accordance with law as it is the duty of the state to maintain the law and order. If any adverse outcome is there, the petitioners are at liberty to file appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum. "
