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

SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE
Ram S/o Dnyanoba Somwanshi – Appellant
Versus
Hariba S/o Gangaram Somwanshi – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Shriram V. Deshmukh, Rajendra Deshmukh
For the Respondent: B.N. Patil

JUDGMENT :

SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J.

1. The present appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 19/04/2019 passed by the learned District Judge-4, Latur, i.e. the learned first appellate court in Regular Civil Appeal No. 4 of 2011. The appellants are the original defendant Nos. 1 to 3 in Regular Civil Suit No. 286 of 2010. Under the impugned judgment and order the learned first appellate court has set aside the judgment and decree dated 26/11/2010 passed by the learned trial court i.e. 2nd Joint Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ausa in the aforesaid suit and directed remand of the proceeding for fresh trial.

2. Background facts are as under:

    The present respondent Nos. 1 to 3/plaintiffs filed the aforesaid suit for recovery of possession, mandatory injunction, perpetual induction and mesne profits by contending that they are the owners of Gut No. 219 at Mouje Wanwada, Taluka Ausa, totally admeasuring 3 H. 74 R. According to them, plaintiff No. 1 is having 1 H 53 R area, plaintiff No. 2 is having 1 H 52 R area whereas plaintiff No. 3 is having 69 R area. Further, according to them, the original defendants were trying to obstruct their possession and therefore, the suit

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