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

1996 Supreme(AP) 98

B.K.SOMASEKHARA
Usman – Appellant
Versus
Anwar Baigh – Respondent


B. K. SOMASEKHARA, J.

( 1 ) THE judgmentof the learned District Judge. Krishna district. Machilipatnam in A. S. NO. 101 of 1986 and the cross objections dated 27-2-1987 are in challenge in this appeal. Appellants are the Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 in O. S. No. 90 of 1975 and the Respondents No. 1 to 7 were the Plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 8 in the suit and respondentno. 1 is the sonof Plaintiffno. 1 Ibrahim Beigh. Respondents No. 8 and 9 are the legal representatives of Plaintiff No. 8. who died pending suit. The convenience warrants the reference to the parties as Plaintiffs and Defendants as they occupied in the trial Court.

( 2 ) ORIGINALLY. Plaintiff No. 1 viz. . Ibrahim Beigh filed the suit and on his death the other Plaintiffs were brought on record as his legal representatives. The defendants No. 2 and 3 Jaibunnisa and Sabrunnessa are the sisters of Plaintiff no. 1. Khadar Baigh and Khatija Bibi are their parents. Defendant No. 1 is the husband of Defendant No. 2. Plaintiffs No. 2 and 8 are the sons and Plaintiffs no. 3 to 7 are the daughters of the 1st plaintiff. The suit was filed for declaration to declare that the gift deeds dated 16-2-1963 and 29-4-1963 executed by Khatija bibi in































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