ANSHUMAN
Saraswati Devi – Appellant
Versus
Kalika Choudhary – Respondent
Dr. Anshuman, J. – Heard learned Sr. Counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The present Second Appeal has been filed by the defendants-respondents-appellants against the judgement passed on 27.02.1988 and decree prepared on 14.03.1988 by the learned 6th Additional District Judge, Rohtas in Title Appeal No. 88 of 1981 reversing and setting aside the judgement passed on 31.08.1981 and decree prepared on 10.09.1981, by the learned 3rd Additional Munsif, Sasaram in Title Suit No. 228 of 1968 by which the suit of the plaintiff-appellants-respondents was dismissed.
3. Vide order No. 3 dated 29.01.1990, the following substantial questions of law were formulated at the time of admitting the present Second Appeal: –
“(a) Whether the lower appellate Court has decided the appeal in a perfunctory way and has failed to consider the bar of the suit under the proviso of Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act and Order XXI Rule 92(3) of the CPC ?
(b) Whether in view of the bar placed by Order XXI Rule 92(3) of the C.P.C., the lower appellate Court was legally entitled to consider the question of infirmity in publishing and conducting the sale ?”
4. The plaintiff – appell
Bhageran Thakur vs. Kewal Singh
Union of India vs. Ibrahimuddin
Baidyanath Prasad Sah vs. Ramphal Sahay
Ashok Layland Ltd. vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Dwarka Prasad Agarwal (D) by L. Rs. vs. B.D. Agarwal
Ramnik Vallabhdas Madhvani vs. Taraben Pravinlal Madhvani
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the plaintiff was not required to ask for possession when the property was in custodia legis, and the defendants had acquired title by adverse....
The original sale deed must be produced to validate property claims; failure to do so leads to adverse inferences and dismissal of the suit.
Civil Suit - Additional Evidence - Wherever additional evidence is allowed the court shall record reason for its admission.
In a suit for declaration of title, the plaintiff must prove ownership; failure to seek possession forfeits claims against an adverse possessor.
Point of law - The general rule is that High Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of the Courts below. But it is not an absolute rule. Some of the well recognized exceptions are where (i....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.