Thursday, Sep 24, 2020 | Last Update : 11:14 AM IST

183rd Day Of Lockdown

Maharashtra122438091634833015 Andhra Pradesh6317495518215410 Tamil Nadu5473374919718871 Karnataka5268764233778145 Uttar Pradesh3588932895945135 Delhi2492592133045014 West Bengal2283021989834421 Odisha184122149379763 Telangana1726081419301042 Bihar169856155824870 Assam159320129130578 Kerala13863398720554 Gujarat1247671051913337 Rajasthan116881972841352 Haryana113075908841177 Madhya Pradesh108167836182007 Punjab99930754092860 Chhatisgarh8618347653680 Jharkhand7267358543626 Jammu and Kashmir65026421151024 Uttarakhand4177729000501 Goa2875322726360 Puducherry2319118065467 Tripura2227215441245 Himachal Pradesh124387836125 Chandigarh102987411123 Manipur9010683859 Arunachal Pradesh7385540813 Nagaland5544445110 Meghalaya4733252838 Sikkim2447190529 Mizoram158510120
  Metros   Delhi  20 Jul 2017  Slum-dwellers battle it out for jhuggi in Delhi HC

Slum-dwellers battle it out for jhuggi in Delhi HC

THE ASIAN AGE. | SUPRIYA KUMARI
Published : Jul 20, 2017, 1:47 am IST
Updated : Jul 20, 2017, 1:47 am IST

Mr Mandal had also filed a suit claiming ownership of the jhuggi, stating that he had been residing in it for a long time.

Jhuggi-dweller Murari Mishra claimed in the trial court that he had handed over the possession of his Jhuggi to one Shivan Mandal when he went to his native for solemnising the marriage of his daughter. (Photo: Debasish Dey)
 Jhuggi-dweller Murari Mishra claimed in the trial court that he had handed over the possession of his Jhuggi to one Shivan Mandal when he went to his native for solemnising the marriage of his daughter. (Photo: Debasish Dey)

New Delhi: Have you ever heard of jhuggi dwellers fighting for a title? One such interesting case was brought before the Delhi High Court by a slum-dweller seeking handing of a Jhuggi to him.

Jhuggi-dweller Murari Mishra claimed in the trial court that he had handed over the possession of his Jhuggi to one Shivan Mandal when he went to his native for solemnising the marriage of his daughter.

 

But when he returned, Mr Mandal refused to return back the jhuggi to him. Mr Mandal was only a licencee of jhuggi without paying any licence fee, counsel for Mr Mishra submitted.

He also filed a counter claim seeking restoration of the possession of the jhuggi to him. Mr Mandal had also filed a suit claiming ownership of the jhuggi, stating that he had been residing in it for a long time.

The trial court dismissed the suit as well as the counter claim of the two jhuggi-dwellers respectively. But the trial court allowed the counter claim of Mr Mishra. Later, Mr Mandal challenged the lower court judgment allowing the counter claim of Mr Mishra in the high court.

 

Dismissing the lower court order, the high court said: “The counter-claim of the respondent/counter-claimant filed could not have been decreed by the learned appellate court in the absence of documentary evidence proving the title in his favour.”

“On the basis of the averments made in the pleadings or evasive denial or absence of specific denial, the court cannot presume title on the respondent for the simple reason that no title can be conferred on the basis of oral testimony or admission made in the pleadings. Title has to be proved by unimpeachable documentary evidence which is lacking in this case,’’ the high court said,

“Without there being any title vested in the respondent/counter-claimant, the first appellate court could not have passed a decree for mandatory injunction thereby directing the restoration of possession of the suit property to the respondent/defendant on the basis of so-called admissions,” the high court stated.

 

Tags: delhi high court, jhuggi dwellers
Location: India, Delhi, New Delhi