TARSEM LAL & ORS. versus RAM SARUP & ORS.

TARSEM LAL & ORS. versus RAM SARUP & ORS.

A tenant who becomes owner of the suit land by operation of law under Section 104(3) of the Act continues to enjoy all rights including irrigation from common source enjoyed prior to the Act. Section 36 protects such rights regardless of change in ownership, and landlord cannot curtail water supply. The High Court erred in restricting Section 36's applicability; trial and appellate courts' findings affirmed.

Parties
Appellants: Tarsem Lal & Ors.; Respondents: Ram Sarup & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
28 April 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Disposition, Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Tenant's Rights to Water, Proprietary Rights Conferred Upon Tenants, Permanent Injunction
Property Law Tenancy Law Tenant's Rights to Water Proprietary Rights Conferred Upon Tenants Permanent Injunction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tarsem Lal & Ors.

Appellants

Ram Sarup & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Disposition, Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a tenant who becomes owner by operation of law under the H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972 continues to enjoy right to water for irrigation from a source situated on original landlord's land
  2. 2 Whether Section 36 of the Act applies to land acquired by tenants as owners
  3. 3 Whether permanent injunction can be issued restraining the owner from interfering with irrigation rights

Ratio Decidendi

A tenant who becomes owner of the suit land by operation of law under Section 104(3) of the Act continues to enjoy all rights including irrigation from common source enjoyed prior to the Act. Section 36 protects such rights regardless of change in ownership, and landlord cannot curtail water supply. The High Court erred in restricting Section 36's applicability; trial and appellate courts' findings affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment and decree of High Court dated 2nd May, 2008 set aside
  • Judgment and decree of Trial Court as confirmed by First Appellate Court affirmed