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

2008 Supreme(Bom) 1585

B.P.DHARMADHIKARI
BHUJANG NATHUJI DAF – Appellant
Versus
RAMKRISHNA DAULAT DAF – Respondent


ADVOCATES APPEARED:
For petitioner: S. P. Kshirsagar
For respondents: R. M. Patwardhan

ORAL JUDGMENT :-

Heard Advocate Shri Kshirsagar for petitioner and Advocate Shri Patwardhan for respondents. .

2. The plaintiff in Regular Civil Suit No. 777/1997 (reregistered as Regular Civil Suit No. 269/2001 before Civil Judge, Junior Division, Saoner) have filed this Writ Petition challenging the order dated 16-1-2008 passed by the 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Saoner on an application/objection of plaintiff. By . the said objection filed on 4-8-2007 the petitioner contended that defendant Nos.2 and 3 (present respondent Nos. 2 and 3) have no right to cross-examine defendant No. 1.

3. The petitioner claim that respondent No. l/defendant No.1 is their uncle and there was partition of ancestral property between their father and said defendant No.1. After getting possession of his separate property, defendant No.1 sold away the same and thereafter encroached upon the property of petitioner and also procured mutation entries in his favour. After completing this' exercise, he sold away said property to defendant Nos. 2 and 3. After learning about all this, they filed Civil Suit No. 777/1997 for claiming possession of encroached property from defendant No.1 and joined defend










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