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

1963 Supreme(Pat) 66

TARKESHWAR NATH, H.MAHAPATRA
Ramcharan Mahto – Appellant
Versus
Custodian Of Evacuee Property – Respondent


Judgment

H.Mahapatra, J.

1. Plaintiffs are the appellants who instituted a suit on the 8th of January, 1957, in the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Bihar in the district of Patna against two defendants, one of whom was the Custodian of Evacuee Property, Bihar (defendant No. 2). The other defendant was Syed Salahuddin Ahmad., son of Syed Imamuddin Ahmad. Another, son of Syed Imamuddin Ahmad was Maslehuddin who was declared an evacuee under the Administration of Evacuee Property Act and half share in the suit property was also declared to be that evacuees property. As that property vested in the Custodian, he was made a party defendant to the suit. Plaintiffs allegations in the plaint were that they were coming in possession of the suit lands as their raiyati holdings and defendant No. 1 or his predecessors-in-interest were never in possession of the same. There were proceedings under Sec.145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in regard to the suit properties, but they were ultimately quashed by the High Court on an application in revision made by the defendant. After the decision in that criminal revision case, defendant No. 1 with the Custodian, defendant No. 2, contemplated to dis







































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