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

2008 Supreme(Pat) 1766

CHANDRAMAULI KR.PRASAD, RAVI RANJAN
Narshing Mishra – Appellant
Versus
Rajendra Mishra – Respondent


JUDGEMENT

1. Appellants,being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 25th of June, 1998 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing the First Appeal No. 818 of 1978 and affirming the judgment and decree dated 11th of September, 1978 passed by the trial court in Title Suit No. 650/132 of 1974/1978, have preferred this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.

2. During the pendency of the first appeal aforesaid the original plaintiffs (appellant nos. 1, 2 and 3 in the first appeal) died and the present appellant nos. 1 to 14 were substituted in their place being their legal representatives. Defendant No. 3 also died during the pendency of the first appeal and his legal representatives were also substituted in his place. Appellant No. 20 is original defendant no. 4 himself. Original defendant nos. 1 and 2 (Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein) died during the pendency of this appeal and the present respondents were substituted in their place being their legal representatives. Similarly appellant nos. 1 and 16 also died during the pending of this appeal. The legal representatives of appellant no. 1 were already on record whereas the legal representatives of appellant no






















































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