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

1982 Supreme(SC) 214

V.BALAKRISHNA ERADI, BAHARUL ISLAM, D.A.DESAI
Jogdhayan – Appellant
Versus
Babu Ram – Respondent


Advocates:
Krishna Datt, M.K.Dua, P.N.PURI, S.K.MEHTA, Uma Datta

Judgment

BAHARUL ISLAM, J. - In this appeal by special leave under Art. 136 of the Constitution, the appellant is the victim of Courts craze for technicalities of law at the cost of justice. This Court exercises its discretionary power under Art. 136 of the Constitution to meet the ends of justice or to remove miscarriage of justice perpetrated in a case.

2. This appeal arises out of an execution proceeding. The facts material for the purpose of disposal of this appeal may be stated thus. The appellant was the plaintiff in a pre-emption suit and, got a decree. Respondent No. 1 was the vendee and respondent No. 2, who was the real brother of the plaintiff-appellant, was the vendor. The suit was for pre-emption and possession in respect of some agricultural land. The trial Court decreed the suit on payment of Rupees 15,500/- as the price of the land and Rs. 100/- as the charges on account of registration and other charges of the deed. The appellant deposited the amount as directed by the Court.

3. Respondent No. 1 filed an appeal and the Additional District Judge who heard and disposed of the appeal dismissed. the appeal with the modification directing the appellant to deposit a sum of























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