CA No. 1920 of 2009 1

     IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1920 OF 2009

   ANIMESH RANJAN & ORS. ..... APPELLANT

VERSUS

   RAI CHANDI NATH SAHAY & ANR. ..... RESPONDENT

WITH  CIVIL APPEAL NO.    OF 2010  

ARISING OUT OF SLP(c) No. 36252 of 2009

O R D E R

1. Leave granted in SLP(C) 36252 of 2009.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at  

length.

3. In the light of the fact that the appellants herein  

had been granted Probate of the Will dated 3rd January,  

1983 and the rival Will set up by the respondents has been  

ignored, we find no balance of convenience in favour of  

the respondent. Certain legal issues have been raised with  

regard  to  the  right  of  the  appellants  to  alienate  the  

property in contravention of the specific bar imposed by

CA No. 1920 of 2009 2

the Will but we find that this matter will have to await a  

decision in the suit which is pending before the trial  

court.  However, keeping in view the facts of the case and  

to balance the equities on both sides it is appropriate  

that as the appellants  have not been able to act upon the  

Will for almost 27 years, we direct that the appellants be  

permitted to complete the building in question.

4. Mr. Shyam Diwan, the learned senior counsel for the  

appellant, further informs us that 32 flats in all have  

been carved out in the building for sale and whereas 19  

have been agreed to be sold, the balance 13 flats will be  

completed but will not be sold or any agreement to sell  

executed in respect of these till further orders.  Mr.  

Diwan further states that in case sale deeds are executed  

with respect to those 19 flats a clause in the sale deed  

would  be  incorporated  highlighting  that  the  matter  was  

subjudice and the parties would be bound by the outcome of  

the proceedings in the civil suit.   

5. In the light of the fact that the matter has been  

pending since long in one forum or the other, we direct  

the trial court to take a decision in the suit within a  

period of six months from today and in case it finds that  

either one or the other party is procrastinating in the

CA No. 1920 of 2009 3

disposal of the suit the trial court will ensure a speedy  

trial, by resorting to the legal provisions available in  

the Code of Civil Procedure.

CA NO. 3654 of 2010 @ SLP(C) No. 36252 of 2009

6. The order of the High Court shall be substituted by  

our order in C.A. No.1920 of 2009.  The matter is disposed  

of accordingly.

    ..................J      [HARJIT SINGH BEDI]

    ..................J      [J.M. PANCHAL]

NEW DELHI APRIL 08, 2010.

CA No. 1920 of 2009 4