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

2023 Supreme(Pat) 950

SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
Krishna Kant Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Sudheshwar Yadav – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Syed Hussain Majeed.
For the Respondents: M/s Jitendra Kishore Verma, Ravi Raj, Shreyash Goyal.

Sunil Dutta Mishra, J. – Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This Civil Misc. Application has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 21.02.2017 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)- 3rd, Patna by which the amendment petition filed by the plaintiffs under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CPC’) for amendment of the plaint in Title Suit No. 211 of 2007 has been allowed.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff no. 1 and defendants are full brothers and plaintiff no. 2 is the sisterin- law of plaintiff no. 1 and they are member of the joint Hindu Mitakshra family living in jointness but separate in mess and business. The plaintiffs filed a Title Partition Suit No. 211 of 2007 for partition of family property on 08.10.2007. The defendant Nos. 1 and 2 transferred their half share in plaint Schedule-I property to the petitioner who was impleaded as defendant no. 3 in the partition suit on his application for impleadment. The petitioner filed his written statement on 07.01.2012 and claimed that the suit property is not joint family property of the plaintiffs and d

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