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

1984 Supreme(SC) 117

V.BALAKRISHNA ERADI, A.P.SEN, D.A.DESAI
Anant Kibe – Appellant
Versus
Purushottam Rao – Respondent


Advocates:
A.G.Ratnaparkhi, D.N.Mishra, G.L.SANGHI, S.D.Mudaliar, S.SUKUMARAN, V.A.BOBDE

JUDGMENT

SEN, J.:—This appeal on certificate is directed against a judgment and decree of the Madhya Pradesh High Court dated May 2, 1969 substantially reversing the judgment and decree passed by the Third Additional District Judge, Indore dated June 18/19, 1962 and dismissing the plaintiffs suit for partition and separate possession of their half share of the suit properties detailed in Schedule A appended to the plaint except with respect to a house and the agricultural lands at Ujjain. During the course of the hearing the parties have come to a settlement and the terms of the compromise have been recorded. Nevertheless, the correctness of the judgment delivered by the High Court is open to serious doubt and as it involves a question of general importance, we proceed to record our views.

2. The facts giving rise to the appeal are as follows. The report of the Inam Commissioner discloses that in 1837 the late Maharaja Harihar Rao Holkar made a grant of an inam of a garden known as Rambag in Kasba Indore admeasuring 15.62 acres to Abaji Ballal, the priest of the Holkar family on his representation that he was in service of the Huzur Durbar for a long period but had no garden at Kasb










































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