>>>welcome visitor, haven't logged in. Login
Subscribe Now Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
Suixi Dumiao Lumber Market Co., Ltd. v. Cong Jiagen (Case of dispute over removal of obstacles)
濉溪县杜庙木材大市场有限公司诉从家根排除妨害纠纷案
【法宝引证码】

Suixi Dumiao Lumber Market Co., Ltd. v. Cong Jiagen (Case of dispute over removal of obstacles)
濉溪县杜庙木材大市场有限公司诉从家根排除妨害纠纷案
Suixi Dumiao Lumber Market Co., Ltd. v. Cong Jiagen (Case of dispute over removal of obstacles) 濉溪县杜庙木材大市场有限公司诉从家根排除妨害纠纷案
[Judgment Abstract] [裁判摘要]
The content of an effective judgment serving as the basis for enforcement should be clear and specific. If an effective judgment is unenforceable and it is actually erroneous, the dispute should be settled through the trial supervision procedure rather than the procedure for instituting a separate action. 作为执行依据的生效判决内容应当明确具体。如果生效判决无法执行且确有错误,也不应当通过另诉程序解决,而应当通过审判监督程序解决。

BASIC FACTS
 
Plaintiff: Suixi Dumiao Lumber Market Co., Ltd., domiciled in Suixi County, Anhui Province. 原告:濉溪县杜庙木材大市场有限公司,住所地:安徽省濉溪县。
Legal Representative: Zhang Shouwei, manager of the Company. 法定代表人:张守维,该公司经理。
Defendant: Cong Jiagen, male, 46 years old, domiciled in Suixi County, Anhui Province. 被告:从家根,男,46岁,住安徽省濉溪县。
Suixi Dumiao Lumber Market Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Dumiao Lumber Market”) instituted this action in the People's Court of Suixi County, Anhui Province against defendant Cong Jiagen due to dispute over removal of obstacles. 原告濉溪县杜庙木材大市场有限公司 (以下简称杜庙木材大市场)因与被告从家根发生排除妨害纠纷,向安徽省濉溪县人民法院提起诉讼。
Plaintiff Dumiao Lumber Market alleged that: In 2011, defendant Cong Jiagen rented 2.6 mus of land from Dumiao Lumber Market and constructed four temporary buildings within the scope of the leased land. After the expiration of the contract, Cong Jiagen refused to perform the renewal obligation or move away. For this regard, Dumiao Lumber Market instituted an action in the People's Court of Suixi County, Anhui Province and requested the Court to order that Cong Jiagen should return the land use rights and compensate for its losses. The People's Court of Suixi County supported the aforesaid claim of Dumiao Lumber Market. Cong Jiagen refused to accept the judgment entered by the People's Court of Suixi County and appealed. The Intermediate People's Court of Huaibei City, Anhui Province dismissed Cong Jiagen's appeal and affirmed the judgment of first instance. Dumiao Lumber Market thus filed an application with the People's Court of Suixi County for enforcement of the judgment of first instance. During the period of enforcement, Cong Jiagen actually compensated for Dumiao Lumber Market's losses to the end of 2014. However, in the process of enforcement, Cong Jiagen still refused to demolish buildings and stacked items within the scope of land use rights of Dumiao Lumber Market. Therefore, Dumiao Lumber Market requested the Court to order that Cong Jiagen should remove the obstacles, demolish all buildings and stacked items within the scope of use rights of the 2.6 mus of land invovled, and compensate Dumiao Lumber Market for its losses starting from January 1, 2015. The specific standard may refer to the judgment (No. 0010 [2014], First, Civil Division II, Suixi). 原告杜庙木材大市场诉称:2011年,被告从家根租用杜庙木材大市场的2.6亩土地,在租用土地范围内搭建了4间临时建筑。合同到期后,从家根拒不履行续订义务也拒绝搬离。为此,杜庙木材大市场起诉至安徽省濉溪县人民法院,要求判令从家根返还土地使用权并赔偿损失,该院支持了杜庙木材大市场的诉讼请求。从家根不服该判决提起上诉,安徽省淮北市中级人民法院驳回从家根的上诉,维持了一审判决。杜庙木材大市场遂向安徽省濉溪县人民法院申请强制执行。在该院执行期间,从家根实际赔偿杜庙木材大市场的损失款至2014年年底。然而,在执行过程中,从家根仍然拒绝拆除在杜庙木材大市场土地使用权范围内的建筑物及堆放物。据此,请求判令从家根排除妨碍,拆除在其2.6亩土地使用权范围内全部建筑物及堆放物,并赔偿杜庙木材大市场自2015年1月1日起的损失,具体标准参照(2014)濉民二初字第0010号判决书。
...... 被告从家根辩称:原告杜庙木材大市场并未依法取得涉案土地的使用权,其起诉本身缺乏诉权。涉案的之前已经生效的两份判决书的判决结果缺乏事实与法律依据,不能作为本案的定案依据,且从家根有新的证据足以否认上述两份判决。2008年 10月1日杜庙木材大市场与涉案村民签订的协议系无效协议,杜庙木材大市场与从家根签订的协议同样是无效协议,均不受法律保护。从家根现在经营的土地是依据 2013年9月5日与相关村民之间签订的协议,与杜庙木材大市场无关。综上,杜庙木材大市场与本案没有任何法律关系,建议驳回其诉讼请求。
 
 安徽省濉溪县人民法院一审查明:
 2008年10月1日,原告杜庙木材大市场的法定代表人张守维以淮北建材市场 (未经依法登记)的名义与濉溪县濉溪镇杜庙村王铁炉村民组32户农民签订《土地租赁协议》,村民自愿将承包地共计75.79亩出租给淮北建材市场用于建设板材市场,租期期限为2008年10月1日起至2018年 10月1日止。2011年6月20日,杜庙木材大市场依法登记成立,法定代表人为张守维。2011年7月1日,杜庙木材大市场与被告从家根签订《场地租赁协议》,该协议约定,杜庙木材大市场将2.6亩土地租给从家根使用,年租金为每亩3446元,使用期限至 2013年7月1日。租赁期满,从家根既不续租又不搬离,杜庙木材大市场为此诉至安徽省濉溪县人民法院,要求从家根返还2.6亩土地的使用权,赔偿损失10万元。安徽省濉溪县人民法院于2014年6月17日作出 (2014)濉民二初字第00010号民事判决:1、从家根于判决生效后五日内返还杜庙木材大市场2.6亩土地使用权(土地位置北邻赵德朋、王少青,西临徐俊、南至路边,东至河堤底。即从南路中心取点,向北垂直量够宽35.5米,再垂直向东量够长48.6米形成的长方形范围),赔偿杜庙木材大市场经济损失8586.3元(3446÷12 X 11.5 X 2.6), 2014年6月20日以后的损失按此标准继续计算至限定的债务履行之日止;2、驳回杜庙木材大市场的其他诉讼请求。从家根不服上诉至安徽省淮北市中级人民法院,安徽省淮北市中级人民法院于2014年9月24日作出(2014)淮民二终字第00160号民事判决,驳回上诉,维持原判。杜庙木材大市场申请原审法院执行期间,从家根已实际赔偿杜庙木材大市场2014年12月31日前的损失。2.6亩土地上的建筑物及堆放物至今未拆除。
 安徽省濉溪县人民法院一审认为:
 公民违反合同应当承担民事责任。本案中,被告从家根租用原告杜庙木材大市场2.6亩土地,合同到期后,其继续占有使用租赁物没有法律依据,依法应当返还,从家根在涉案土地上的建筑物及堆放物应当拆除,故对原告杜庙木材大市场要求从家根拆除涉案土地上的建筑物及堆放物的诉讼请求予以支持。被侵权人有权请求侵权人承担侵权责任,侵权人造成的损失应当予以赔偿,从家根在合同到期后继续占有使用租赁物未有法律依据,给原告造成了一定的经济损失,其应按照同期土地租赁费用赔偿杜庙大市场损失,自2015年1月起按照每亩年租金3446元的标准赔偿。
 综上,安徽省濉溪县人民法院依照《中华人民共和国民法通则》第一百零六条第一款、第一百三十四条,《中华人民共和国合同法》第八条、第四十四条、第二百三十五条,《中华人民共和国侵权责任法》第三条、第十五条,《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第六十四条,《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》第二条之规定,于 2015年4月27日判决:
 ......

Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.

1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.

2. Binding to the account with access to this database.

3. Apply for a trial account.

4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【¥500.00】 for your single purchase.
 
您好:您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com
     
     
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese