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

2003 Supreme(Del) 386

J.D.KAPOOR
HARI RAM – Appellant
Versus
LALA OM PRAKASH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
PARVIN GAUTAM, PRAMOD AGARWAL, S.P.AGARWAL, SANDIP AGARWAL

J. D. KAPOOR

( 1 ) PARTIES are real brothers. Plaintiff has through this suit sought partition of their father s property no. 1775, Kucha Lattu Shah, Dariba Kalan, Chandani Chowk, Delhi. Case of the plaintiff in brief is that the plaintiff after the death of his father who was absolute owner of the suit property, became the owner of the one half share along with the defendant who has also one half share in undivided property. Admittedly portion shown in mark yellow is in occupation of the defendant whereas the portion shown in green is in occupation of the plaintiff. Portion mark red is in common possession. According to the plaintiff the portion in his occupation does not comprise one half of the area in the said undivided property and since both of them are real brothers, he has requested the defendant to partition the said property by metes and bounds according to their respective shares but the defendant has not bothered to give heed to his requests. Rather the defendant is trying to sell his portion of the undivided share in the said property. The cause of action arose on 3. 1. 91 when the defendant refused to partition the suit property.

( 2 ) ON the other hand defendant has p





























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