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

1957 Supreme(AP) 123

MOHAMMED AHMED ANSARI
D. Sardar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Seth Pissumal Harbhagwandas Bankers – Respondent


Advocates:
Venkatarao Savarikar for Sadasiv Rao, for Appellant; N.S. Raghavan and Chowsalkar, for Respondent.

JUDGMENT : This appeal by the plaintiff is against the decree of the Lower appellate Court, whereby the appellants suit for the declaration of his title to a house has been dismissed and the decree of the trial Court varied.

2. The facts in the case are not complicated. On June 16, 1949, the respondent had a house No. 31, Sadar Bazar, Bolaram, attached in execution of his decree against Abdul Majid Khan. The appellant by a sale deed of June 20, 1949, has purchased the same house. Some of the executants of the sale deed are not the owners; but profess to be holders of two powers of attorney from four persons, who claim to be the owners and were then in Pakistan. One of such executants is Mohd. Ayud Khan and purports to be the holder of a power of attorney from Abdul Majid Khan. The other, Abdul Rahman Khan, claims to have another power of attorney in his favour by Abdul Aziz Khan. Abdul Haq Khan and Mt. Kulfatbi.

Both these powers of attorney are admitted to have been executed and registered in Pakistan. Ex. P. 6 is the document in favour of Abdul Majid, and Ex. P. 7 is in favour of the Abdul Rahman Khan. These, however, are not on the records of the case; but the learned Judge of the











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