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

2007 Supreme(SC) 254

ARIJIT PASAYAT, R.V.RAVEENDRAN
Nathuni Ram – Appellant
Versus
Raghupat Ram – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J.—Leave granted.

2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Jharkhand High Court. The plaintiff, who had filed the second appeal before the High Court under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short the ‘Code’), has filed this appeal.

3. Detailed reference to the factual aspect is really unnecessary.

4. Plaintiff had filed the suit for declaration of title as well as confirmation of possession over the suit land. The description of the property was given as plot No. 51 measuring 36 decimal of land appertaining to Khata No. 80 of Village Japla, Dhorhara, District Palamu. The suit was dismissed by the learned Munsif Daltonganj.

5. An appeal was carried before the first appellate court. In the appeal, learned VIII Additional District Judge, Palamau held that the appellant’s claim was to be accepted in respect of 22 decimal of land and that the defendants had got possession over 14 decimals of land. Appellant filed appeal under Section 100 of the Code questioning correctness of the view expressed by the first appellate court.

The following question was formulated in the second appeal treating








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