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

1995 Supreme(SC) 1167

M.M.PUNCHHI, SUJATA V.MANOHAR
Taibai – Appellant
Versus
Annasaheb Goudappa Patil – Respondent


JUDGMENT

SUJATA V. MANOHAR, J. - The appellants in this appeal are the heirs of the original plaintiff. The suit land being Survey No. 133 admeasuring 20 acres 37 guntas is situated in Amtur Village in Bailahongal Taluk in the State of Karnataka. It is vatan land. On the coming into force of the Karnataka Village Offices Abolition Act, 1961 on 1-2-1963 the said land was resumed by the State on abolition of all village offices. Section 5(1) of the said Act provides for regrant of land resumed under Section 4(3) to the holder of the village office. Accordingly, the land was regranted to the original plaintiff on 7-4-1978.

2. Prior, however, to the regrant of the land in favour of the plaintiff, the plaintiff had entered into an agreement dated 5-8-1977 with the defendant i.e., the present respondent under which she had agreed to sell this land to the defendant for a sum of sum of Rs. 60,000. The agreement recited that an amount of Rs. 40,000 was paid by the defendant to the plaintiff as earnest money. Possession of the land was also given to the defendant. Accordingly the defendant was in possession of the land since 5-8-1977. The present suit was filed by the plaintiff for possessio











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