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

1993 Supreme(SC) 188

KULDIP SINGH, S.MOHAN
Laxmishankar Harishankar Bhatt – Appellant
Versus
Yashram Vasta – Respondent


Advocates:
B.N.AGRAWAL, P.H.Parekh, VIMAL DAVE

JUDGMENT

MOHAN, J.:—Undaunted by the failure in both the Courts below, the appellant has come up in appeal before this Court. The facts lie in a narrow compass.

2. The appellant filed Special Civil Suit No. 54 of 1970 in a Court of Civil Judge at Jamnagar for recovery of possession together with mesne profits, of suit properties which are survey No. 34 measuring an extent of 8 acres 7 gunthas and survey No. 35 measuring an extent of 9 acres 8 gunthas. There is also a house situate in survey No. 34. According to the appellant, he purchased the property from Narashankar Velji and others by a registered sale deed dated 12-2-1968 for a sum of Rupees 6,000 /- As such, he became the sole owner of the suit property. Vashram Vasta was originally the tenant of the appellants predecessor-in-title. After the death of said Vashram Vasta, defendant Nos. I to 4, his sons and Defendant No. 5, his widow continued in possession of the suit property. A suit notice was issued on 14-4-1968 demanding possession but that did not evoke any response. Therefore, the suit.

3. The respondents in the written statement questioned inter alia the jurisdiction of the civil Court to try the suit as it was barred by
















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