Back
SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
Savitri Joshi – Appellant
Versus
Rameshwar Yagnik @ Lall Saheb – Respondent
Sunil Dutta Mishra, J.—Heard Learned counsel for both the parties.
2. The instant First Appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the judgment dated 28.04.2014 and decree dated 23.05.2014 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge IV, Bettiah in Title Suit No. 72 of 2010 wherein the learned Trial Court disposed of the suit on admission and decreed in terms of pronouncement of compromise decree of Partition Suit No. 159 of 1949 and permanently restrained the appellants (defendants) to interfere in peaceful possession of respondents (plaintiffs) over the suit land.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are being referred to as defendants-appellants or plaintiffs-respondents.
4. To understand the relationship between the parties to the suit is shown in the Genealogical Table (Schedule 1 of plaint) which is given below:—
5. As per the plaint, Bindhyawasini Pd. Yagnik (Jani) @ Bacchan Babu was common ancestor who died leaving behind Smt. Krishna Kumari Devi, his second wife from whom three sons and one daughter namely Rajeshwar Pd. Yagnik @ Babu Saheb, Rameshwar Pd. Yagnik @ Lall Sahab (P-1) and Chandeshwar Pd. Yagnik @ Kunwar Saheb and a daughter Manju Yagnik (Shukla) were bor
The court emphasized the need for clear admissions and the appropriate use of discretion under Order XII Rule 6, ruling that judgments on admissions must be based on unequivocal facts, necessitating ....
Admissions in pleadings or related documents allow for expedited judgments under Order XII Rule 6 CPC, affirming that clear and unequivocal admissions can preclude the need for further evidence.
(1) Judgment on admission – For exercise of discretion by Court under Order XII Rule 6 of CPC, admission must be unequivocal – No particular form of admission is necessary – Judgment on admission is ....
The discretionary nature of the power under Order XII Rule 6, the need for clear and unambiguous admissions, and the discretion of the court in delivering a quick judgment on admission.
Prior oral partition established through documentary evidence negated plaintiffs' claims for additional shares in joint family properties under Hindu Succession Act.
Admissions in pleadings serve as binding evidence of ownership; a probated Will grants legal rights to legatees, making further proof unnecessary when parties do not contest the matter.
A family settlement, even if unregistered, is binding if acted upon, and courts can issue a decree on admission when clear admissions exist, emphasizing the discretionary nature of Order XII Rule 6.
The court emphasized that admissions in pleadings and family settlements can warrant a decree without trial under Order XII Rule 6 of the CPC, reinforcing the binding nature of such settlements.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
