LALLU YESHWANT SINGH versus RAO JAGDISH SINGH & ORS.

LALLU YESHWANT SINGH versus RAO JAGDISH SINGH & ORS.

Landlord cannot forcibly dispossess tenant even after extinguishment of tenancy due to arrears; summary remedy for recovery of possession is available to person in prior possession who is dispossessed not in due course of law, irrespective of title. Forcible entry by landlord constitutes trespass under s. 326 Qanoon Mal. The High Court erred in quashing Board of Revenue order; restoration of possession appropriate.

Parties
Appellant: Lallu Yeshwant Singh; Respondents: Rao Jagdish Singh & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
29 November 1967
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Decision of Madhya Bharat (now Madhya Pradesh) High Court Quashing Decision of Board of Revenue
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Ejectment of Tenants, Recovery of Possession, Summary Remedy, Forcible Dispossession

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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lallu Yeshwant Singh

Appellant

Rao Jagdish Singh & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Decision of Madhya Bharat (now Madhya Pradesh) High Court Quashing Decision of Board of Revenue

  1. 1 Whether a landlord can forcibly eject a defaulting ryotwari tenant without recourse to law
  2. 2 Whether prior possession is sufficient for suit under s. 326 Qanoon Mal akin to s. 9 Specific Relief Act
  3. 3 Whether title is relevant in summary possession suits under Qanoon Mal/Qanoon Ryotwari

Ratio Decidendi

Landlord cannot forcibly dispossess tenant even after extinguishment of tenancy due to arrears; summary remedy for recovery of possession is available to person in prior possession who is dispossessed not in due course of law, irrespective of title. Forcible entry by landlord constitutes trespass under s. 326 Qanoon Mal. The High Court erred in quashing Board of Revenue order; restoration of possession appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Judgment of High Court set aside
  • Order of Board of Revenue restored