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

2004 Supreme(Pat) 521

V.N.SINHA
Deo Kumar Sah – Appellant
Versus
Mahesh Pd. Rai – Respondent


Judgment

1. Heard Sri Mahesh Narain Prabat onbehalf of the petitioner. No one appeared on behalf of the opposite party in spite of receipt of notice by them.

2. This civil revision application is directed against the order dt. 23.2.01 passed by the Subordinate Judge II, Chapra in Execution case no. 3/98 by which he has refused the prayer to amend the description and area of the land indicated in Schedule III of the plaint. Learned counsel appearing in support of this application has submitted that before filing of this suit another suit bearing Title Suit no. 100/75 was contested between Mostt. inri and Deo Kr. Sah, the plaintiff-petitioner. During the pendency of that suit a gift deed was executed by Mostt. inri in favour of opposite party nos. 5 and 6 herein. Later ignoring the contents of the said deed of gift, compromise was arrived at between the parties i.e. Most inri and Deo Kr. Sah in the earlier suit and the suit was decreed in terms of compromise under judgment and decree date. 6.8.1976. In terms of the compromise decree Schedule I and Schedule II lands came to the share of Mostt. Inri and Deo Kr. Sah respectively. Later opposite party nos. 5 and 6 sold a portion of land w


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