SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(SC) 801

B.P.SINGH, M.B.SHAH
Nagina Singh – Appellant
Versus
Naga Singh – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Bisheshwar Prasad Singh, J.-Special Leave granted.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. In this appeal the appellants have impugned the order of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in LPA No. 829 of 1998 dated 23.11.2000, whereby a division bench of the High Court affirmed the order of a learned Single Judge in First Appeal No.165 of 1976 dated 05.02.1998, dismissing the application for substitution of legal representatives of appellants 1(d) and 1(e). Consequently, the first appeal was also dismissed as being incompetent in the absence of the legal representatives of the aforesaid appellants.

4. The appellants and the respondents herein are the descendants of one Shri Bhukhalal Singh, who had two sons namely, Ramnandan Singh and Ramautar Singh. According to the appellants, the two branches of the family separated on 05.09.1947 and thereafter managed their affairs separately. The branch of Ramnandan Singh had acquired some more properties after partition and prospered. Out of sheer greed, Naga Singh son of Ramautar Singh belonging to the other branch filed a partition suit for partition of the properties left by his grandfather Bhukhalal Singh. In the said suit Ramna










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top