ANIL R.DAVE, ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
Susana Rani David – Appellant
Versus
Esther Jaspher Swaminathan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Anil R. Dave, J.
1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. Leave granted.
3. Upon perusal of the impugned judgment and the facts pertaining to the case, we find that the main dispute in the appeals is only with regard to the share of defendant No.4-Victoria Srinivasan.
4. In the course of hearing of these appeals, the appellants had relied upon a sale deed dated 29th June, 2001 executed by defendant No.4, by virtue of which some property had been sold by her. The said document has not been exhibited before any court. The said sale deed is permitted to be placed on record so that it may be looked into by the High Court and consider its effects on the compromise deed entered into among some of the parties.
5. In these circumstances, we dispose of these appeals with a direction that a review application shall be filed by the appellants within four weeks from today before the High Court and the High Court shall permit the appellants to do the needful to get the said document exhibited.
6. The High Court shall consider the effect of the said sale deed after hearing the concerned parties and if necessary, may modify the impugned judgment and pass appropriate order in accordanc
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.