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

2015 Supreme(Kar) 1231

B.MANOHAR
K. S. Ponnappa – Appellant
Versus
K. S. Bheemaiah – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : B.S. Shashi Bhushan

ORDER :

B. Manohar, J.

1. Petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 10704/2006 on the file of the XVII Additional City Civil Judge at Bengalum. Being aggrieved by the order dated 7-7-2012 made on I.A. No. 8 filed under Sections 65 and 66 of the Indian Evidence Act, the petitioners have filed this writ petition.

2. The petitioners had filed a suit seeking for partition and separate possession of 1/10th share each in the suit schedule property by metes and bounds. In the plaint, it was contended that the mother of the plaintiffs got the suit schedule property as per the agreement of sale on 28-06-1984. The original copy of the agreement of sale is with the second defendant and the plaintiffs have got only Xerox copy of the said document. It is the contention of the plaintiffs that they had also contributed for purchase of the suit schedule property and hence all the children of late K.A. Somaiah are entitled to their respective share in the suit schedule property. The plaintiffs have also filed an application I.A. No. 8 seeking permission to mark the Xerox copy of the agreement of sale as secondary evidence since they do not possess the original copy. The contesting defendants filed th









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