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

2023 Supreme(Bom) 2057

ANIL S. KILOR
Pratibha – Appellant
Versus
Usha Purushottam Daterao – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
V.K. Kothale, Advocate, J.J. Chandurkar, Advocate

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. Heard.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties.

3. The second appeal is arising out of the judgment and decree dtd. 27/9/2019 passed by District Judge-3, Amravati, dismissing the appeal and confirming the judgment and decree dtd. 13/8/2007 passed by the Civil Judge Senior Division, Amravati in Special Civil Suit No.31 of 1996, decreeing the suit for partition and separate possession.

4. The brief facts of the present case are as under: (The parties are referred to as per their status before the trial Court) The plaintiffs/respondent Nos. 1 to 6 filed a suit for partition and separate possession. It was the case of the plaintiffs that the plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 and the defendant Nos.1 and 2 are the real brothers and they jointly purchased the field survey No.35/2 Adm. 24A 5G and survey No.66 Adm. 10A 27G (hereinafter referred to as "suit property") situated at Pragane Badnera, Taluka and District Amravati and as such, they are having 1/4th share each in the suit field being co-owners.

5. The defendant No.1 appeared and resisted the claim. It is the case of the defendant No.1 that, though the suit field was purchased in joint names

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