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

2005 Supreme(Kar) 499

V.G.SABHAHIT
PUTLABAI – Appellant
Versus
VAIJNATH – Respondent


Advocates:
JAYAKUMAR S.PATIL, K.APPA RAO

( 1 ) THIS appeal by the plaintiff is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sedam, in r. A. No. 140/2002, dated 25-2-2003 reversing the judgment and decree passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chincholi, in O. S. No. 29 of 1978, dated 30-9-1999 and dismissing the suit of the plaintiff for injunction holding that the suit for bare injunction without seeking for declaration of title is not maintainable.

( 2 ) THE essential facts of the case leading upto this appeal with reference to the rank of the parties before the Trial Court are as follows.- the plaintiff filed the suit O. S. No. 29 of 1978 seeking for permanent injunction against the defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by the plaintiff. The suit schedule property comprises of three items of landed properties and a house as described in para 2 of the plaint.

( 3 ) IT is the case of the plaintiff that Ningappa was the owner in possession of the house and the landed properties and the plaintiff was living with Ningappa. Ningappa had executed a registered Will in favour of the plaintiff on 15-9-1










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