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

1985 Supreme(Kar) 390

KULKARNI
SYED AMJAD PASHA QADI – Appellant
Versus
RAHIMUNNISA BEGUM – Respondent


KULKARNI, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a revision by defendant-4 against the order dated 18-2-1981 passed by the Munsiff, gulbarga, in F. D. P. No. 14 of 1980 (O. S. No. 110/69) appointing a Commissioner under Order 26 Rules 13 and 14 C. P. C.

( 2 ) ONE Mohd. Ibrahim who died on 6-3 1961 had left behind him his daughter Rahimunnisa the plaintiff, and two sons Abdul Gafoor defendant-1 and Mohd. Abdul Kareem defendant-2. He left behind him the suit properties.

( 3 ) WE are concerned at this stage only with item No. 1 of the property. The decree passed in relation to item No. 1 is that the plaintiff has got 1/5th share, defendant-2 has got 2/5th share and defendant-4 has got 2/5th share. Defendant- I sold the suit item No. 1 property to defendant-3 on 204-1967. In turn defendant 3 sold item No. 1 property to defendant-4 under a sale deed dated 9-8-1968. Defendant-3 had agreed to sell this very property to defendant-4 under an agreement dated 26-1-1967. This decree was ultimately confirmed by this Court in R. S. A. No. 1113 of 1979.

( 4 ) NOW an application for final decree proceedings has been filed by the plaintiff for partition by metes and bounds of her l/5th share. The Trial Court appoint



















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