Land dispute case: Apex court dismisses petition against property recovery
SHILLONG: The Supreme Court has dismissed the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the wife of senior advocate SP Mahanta on January 5 against the recovery of property in their possession at Lower Lachumiere as ordered in two judgments, one by Full Bench of the High Court of Meghalaya and another by the former Chief Justice of High Court PC Pant.
But, the order of the Supreme Court on January 5 said,” However, it is made clear that any observations or expressions made in the impugned judgments will not in any way be used against the petitioners in a suit for specific performance”.
Mahanta had filed the SLP against the order of the Full Bench of the High Court of Meghalaya comprising Chief Justice Uma Nath Singh, Justice T.N.K. Singh and Justice S.R. Sen on September 10 last year which had upheld the June 23, 2014 order of former Chief Justice of the High Court PC Pant, who in fact upheld the order of former District Judge B. Giri which said that Tushar Bhattacharjee and his sisters – Sujata Bezbaruah and Sabita Goswami – were entitled to get back the possessions of the land along with the houses as the continued possession of the land by Mahanta was illegal.
The order of the District Judge which was endorsed by the High Court of Meghalaya said that the “appellants (Bhattacharjee and others) were entitled to get back the possessions of the piece or parcel of land at Lachumiere with the houses standing thereon”.
Giri had also re-produced the description of land as “measuring more or less 14,285 sq feet covered by plot no. 80 comprised in Patta No. 58 situated at Lachumiere (of European Ward), Shillong, whereupon there stands two Assam type houses of which one is the main house and the other one is the outhouse”.
Mahanta and his wife Venetta Kharsyntiew, had earlier challenged the jurisdiction of District Judge B. Giri and her order by saying that with the appointment of M.B. Challam, Additional Deputy Commissioner (Ad hoc), Fast Track Court, Giri had no jurisdiction and her order was irrelevant.
However, the High Court had observed that the appointment of Challam was temporary in nature and the District Judge had the overall jurisdiction.
While the Non Resident Indian Tushar Nath Bhattacharjee is jubilant over Apex Court dismissing the SLP filed by Mahanta, the latter , however, said that though the recovery party was won by the respondent, the specific performance case is still open.
When contacted on Tuesday, Mahanta said that they wanted Tushar and others to complete the contract which was signed by them.
“There was an injunction from the Court in 2004 which said that Tushar and others cannot sell the property to anybody else in the context of their move to sell it to TS Bareh then” , he said
Mahanta also reiterated that there was no land grabbing on his part as it was an agreement to sell made by Tushar and others.
Earlier, the FIR lodged by Vennetta Kharsyntiew , the wife of Mahanta at Laitumkhrah police station on February 3, 2011 said that Sujata Bezbaruah along with her brother, Tushar had deceived her with mala fide intention of cheating by selling the property comprising 14,285 sq ft situated at Lower Lachumiere and the duo had taken Rs 4,30,000 out of the agreed amount of Rs 12,00,000 for sale on June 8, 1992.
The FIR said that for making payment of remaining amount of over Rs7,00,000 on or before June 13, 1992, an amicable settlement was arrived at the chamber of Senior Advocate S R Sen by Bhattachajee and his family members. However, this was not followed up.