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

2016 Supreme(Bom) 705

A.B.CHAUDHARI
Chandramani son of Marotrao Pantavne – Appellant
Versus
Shashikala wife of Brijlal Bisen – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :S.D. Malke, Advocate.
For the Respondent:S.G. Karmarkar, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

A.B. Chaudhari, J.

This Court had issued notice for final disposal of this Second Appeal on 14th July, 2014 having been prima facie convinced that the dispute between the parties was required to be resolved by having measurements from the experts from the concerned Govt. Department, since it was found, while issuing notice, that both the Courts on their own based their findings on the basis of papers, maps etc., placed before them, i.e., without appointing a Surveyor from the concerned Govt. Department, to find out the exact claim of the parties to the dispute.

2. Upon service of notice, learned Adv. Mr. Karmarkar appears for the respondent sole. Mr. Karmarkar fairly states that it would be proper that both the parties to the dispute know the exact measurements of the properties they own and posses, as they have purchased their respective properties for payment of valuable consideration. It is in this context, both the parties have, therefore, agreed for having a final disposal of this appeal at the admission stage, in order that no further years are wasted in the Court.

3. In












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