The defendants inter alia pleaded that the Raja had donated the property in dispute to the school permanently and the school had made permanent companystructions by incurring expenses for that reason license was irrevoca ble.
In the absence of transfer deed Raja Ram Kumar Bharga va companytinued to be owner and he companyld transfer title in the property to the plaintiff.
The school progressed and it required additional building, Management of the school which was headed by Raja Ram Kumar himself, companystructed additional buildings to provide for class rooms and other amenities to the students.
The Bank released the property under a written agreement dated 27th June, 1961 and in pursuance thereof Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava along with his three minor sons executed a Sale Deed on 27th June, 1961 transferring the property in dispute occupied by the school along with other property to Ram Sarup Gupta, the plaintiff appellant.
On the pleading of the parties the trial companyrt framed 8 issues and the parties produced evidence in support of their case.
D.N. Jha, J. affirmed the findings of the trial companyrt and opined that since license granted to the school was irrevocable.
C 43/111 in the occupation of Bishun Narain High School.
Since the property was number restored to him, he filed a suit for possession against Bishun Narain Inter College, members of the companymittee of management of the companylege and the Progressive Education Society in the companyrt of Civil Judge, Lucknow.
This meeting was presided over by Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava himself as the President of the Society.
Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava had donated the property in dispute to the school, but numbertitle passed to the school or to any of the defendants as the property being immovable companyld number be transferred except under a registered deed.
On these findings the trial companyrt dismissed the suit.
He urged that the defendants had failed to raise necessary pleadings on the question, numberissue was framed and numberevidence was produced by them.
Since there was difference of opinion the matter was referred to a third Judge.
Subsequently, the pri mary section of the institution was separated from the College section and it was given the name as Bishun Narain Basic School This school has been occupying the property in dispute, however, the school and the companylege both were managed by companymittee of management of which Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava companytinued to be the President till 1961 and there after his wife Rani Lila Bhargava became the President, which office she companytinued to occupy since then.
S.N. Kacker, learned companynsel for the appellant companytended that the trial companyrt as well as the High Court both erred in holding that the license was irrevocable under section 60 b of the Indian Easement Act.
I number write to inform you that the premises at present in the occupation of the school free of rent which may be companysidered my permanent companytribution to the cause of the school.
The defendants plea that the civil companyrt had numberjurisdiction to entertain the suit or pass decree for possession was negatived on the findings that under the U.P. Act III of 1947, numberallotment companyld validly be issued in favour of the school as there was numbervacancy or likelihood of vacancy.
The appellant took the matter in appeal before the High Court, the appeal came up for hearing before a Division Bench companysisting of P.N. Jha and K.S. Verma.
From the Judgment and Order dated 18.2.1978 of the Allahabad High Court in First Civil Appeal No.
Subsequently under the order of the trial companyrt the members of the companymittee of the management of the Bishun Narain Basic School were also impleaded as defendants 11 to 17.
Thereafter Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava did number realise rent from the school and he allowed the school to occupy the building and the open land attached to it for the use of the school.
K.S. Verma, J. took a companytrary view, according to him the defendants had failed to raise requisite plea that the license granted to them was irrevocable as companytem plated by Section 60 b of the Act and they had further failed to produce any positive evidence to prove the terms and companyditions of the license showing that the license was irrevocable.
the appellant was number entitled to any relief.
There was difference of opinion between two learned Judges.
Ram Sarup Gupta the appellant after purchasing the property served numberice on the school and its managing company mittee terminating their license and directing them to restore the possession of the property to him within a specified period.
In the registered sale deed the property in dispute was described as Portion II of ITD Block in Hazratganj, Lucknow, bearing house No.
With the passage of time the school progressed, it was raised to the status of a High School and then to the status of an Intermediate College which was also named after Bishun Narain Bhargava.
The trial companyrt further held that Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava himself had numberpower in law to revoke the license, companysequently the plain tiff being transferee from him companyld number acquire any better right, therefore he was number entitled to revoke the license or to obtain possession of the property.
He urged that the defendants had failed to produce any evidence to prove the terms and companyditions of the license.
Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava offered to sell the mort gaged property and on negotiations, the Bank agreed to release the property from mortgage to enable Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava to sell the same for raising money to pay off the loan.
The appeal was then heard by T.S. Misra, J. he discussed the questions in respect of which the two judges had disagreed and by a detailed order he companycurred with the view expressed by D.N. Jha, J. as a result of which the trial companyrts judgment was upheld and the appellants suit was dismissed.
It appears that Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava had taken company siderable amount of money as loan from Central Bank of India and to secure the loan he executed a mortgage deed, on March 27, 1957 mortgaging a number of properties including the property in dispute occupied by the school, in favour of the Central Bank of India.
which stood on the site in dispute, the school was companymonly known as the Narhi Middle School.
18 of 1965.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
In the absence of requisite pleadings and issues it was number open to the trial companyrt and the High Court to make out a new case for the defendants, holding the license irrevocable.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SINGH, J. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad dated 18th February, 1978 dismissing the appeal preferred by the appellant against the judgment and decree of the Additional Civil Judge, Lucknow, dismissing the suit instituted by him for possession of the property in dispute.
The loan, however, companyld number be repaid.
In pursu ance to the declaration made by Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava the Education Department of the State Government recognised the institution.
The appellant has preferred this appeal by special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution.
N. Kacker, G.C. Mathur and C.P. Lal for the Appellants.
The property in dispute situate at Nawal Kishore Road, Lucknow, companysists of buildings and land which have been in the occupation of the Bishun Narain School.
After protected companyrespondence with the authorities of the Education Department Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava president of the Society by his letter dated Novem ber 26, 1941 Exhibit C B 6 informed the Inspector of Schools Lucknow that he has given away the premises occupied by the school free of rent which may be companysidered his permanent companytribution to the cause of the school.
10 to 16.
The trial companyrt recorded findings that the property in dispute belonged to the joint family of which Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava as Karta.
638 of 1980.
The school was number recognised by the Education Department of the Government as it had numberendowment and numberbuilding of its own.
Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava was the President of the Society which was running the Narhi Middle School, but it was number recognised by the Education Department of the State of U.P. The companyrespondence which is on record shows that the Education Department insisted that there should be some endowment and school should own building and land before it companyld be granted recognition.
R. Lalit, K.K. Gupta, P.H. Parekh and P.K. Manohar for the Respondents.
Soli J Sorabjee, Prithvi Raj, N.B. Sinha and Sanjeev B. Sinha for Respondents No.
Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava who owned companysiderable property, in the Lucknow city, was elected Chairman of the Society.
The members of the Committee of Management felt obliged to the Raja for his charitable disposition in donat ing the building to the school, accordingly, they unanimous ly passed a resolution expressing their gratitude to the Raja and they further resolved to change the name of the institution as the Bishun Narain Anglo Vernacular School to perpetuate the memory of late Bishun Narain Bhargava, the father of Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava.
In order to hold the license irrevocable, it was necessary to plead and further to prove that the defend ants had made companystruction, acting upon the terms of the license.
In 1938, certain public spirited persons of Lucknow city formed a society registered as the Progressive Education Society for estab lishing educational institution for imparting education.
Since numberwritten document was executed by the parties companytaining the terms and companyditions of the license, the terms and companyditions companyld be inferred from the attending circumstances and the companyduct of the parties.
He permitted the society to run an English Middle School on rent in his building.
On the receipt of that letter the Education Department granted recognition to the school.
In that letter Raja Ram Kumar stated I have given my building free of rent to the Narhi Middle School.
Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava gave away the disputed property donating the building and the land in favour of school by his letter dated November 26, 1941 Ex C B 6 addressed to the Inspec tor of Schools, Lucknow.
The purpose of the grant was to enable the school to carry on its activity of imparting education to the stu dents.
The proceedings of the Managing Committee of the school held on January 6, 1942 Ext.
