KHATIM REZA
Raja Ram Singh @ Raja Ram Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Poonam Kumari – Respondent
Khatim Reza, J. – Heard Mr. Jitendra Kishore Verma, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. S.N.P. Singh, learned senior counsel for the respondents.
2. This Second Appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 29.04.2013 passed by the learned Additional District Judge- II, Danapur, Patna in Title Appeal No. 17 of 2009 whereby the learned lower Appellate Court reversed the judgement and decree dated 20.01.2009 passed by the learned Munsif, Danapur, Patna in Title Partition Suit No. 143 of 1989.
3. The plaintiff-appellant filed Partition Suit No. 143 of 1989 for challenging the gift deed dated 24/25-09-1986 executed by her father in favour of his two nephews (brother’s sons) alleging it to be fraudulent, fabricated, void ab initio and not binding upon her. Accordingly, she prayed for a declaration to that effect and sought partition of her half share in Schedule II property.
4. The case of the plaintiff is that one Basudev Singh was the common ancestor of the parties having three sons namely, Shiv Nandan Singh, Shyam Nandan Singh and Ram Lakhan Singh. Shiv Nandan Singh had two sons namely, Ram Naresh Prasad Singh (father of the plaintiff and donor of the gift deed) and
Thamma Venkata Subbamma (Dead) by Lrs. vs. Thamma Rattamma
Palani Ammal vs. Muthuvenkatachala Moniagar
Nagindas Ramdas vs. Dalpatram Iccharam alias Brijram
Smt. Subhamati Devi vs. Awadhesh Kumar Singh, 2014 (1) PLJR 332 (para 12
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.