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

2019 Supreme(Chh) 212

RAM PRASANNA SHARMA
Mati Bai – Appellant
Versus
Pushpa Devi (Tiwadi) Sharma – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Kishore Bhaduri, Adv., Shreekumar Agrawal, Adv., Anand Kumar Gupta, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

Ram Prasanna Sharma, J.

This appeal is preferred under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the judgment/decree dated 23-11-2004 passed by 2nd Additional District Judge, Baloda Bazar, District Raipur (CG) in Civil Suit No.21-A/2003 wherein the said court decreed the suit in favour of respondent No.1 for specific performance of contract regarding land bearing survey No. 385/1 actual area 0.238 hectares (in agreement 0.368 hectares), situated at village Hathani, Patwari Halka No. 6, Revenue Circle and Tahsil Bhatapara.

2. The respondent Pushpa Devi and her husband Om Prakash/plaintiffs have filed a suit on 20-8-2003 and it is pleaded that though agreement was entered into between the parties for land area 0.368 hectares but it was actually found after measurement to be 0.238 hectares. As per contract, the rate of land was Rs.2,80,000/- per acre.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit as under:

(i) The land in question was earlier recorded in the name of Jagdish Prasad who was husband of Mati Bai and after death of Jagdish name of Mati Bai was recorded as owner, Jania Bai was daughter of said Jagdish and therefore, Mati Bai was not sole owner of th

















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