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

DELHI HIGH COURT
K.RAMAMOORTHY
Raj Kumari Srivastava – Appellant
Versus
Rajesh Kumar Srivastava – Respondent


ORDER

K.Ramamoorthy, J.

1. I shall now take up suit No. 1369/95. Plaintiff Smt. Raj Kumari Srivastava is the mother of defendants 1 to 4. The fact that plaintiff is entitled to half share in the suit property is not disputed. As a matter of fact, a preliminary decree declaring the 50% share of the plaintiff in me suit property was passed on the 28th of August 1995.

2. A local commissioner was appointed to divide the property suggesting mode for division by metes and bounds.

3. In view of the fact mat the parties do not dispute the rights of the plaintiff in the suit property, I do not want to set out the facts in detail except a very few to appreciate the present situation.

4. Originally, me property belonged to Sh. Shyam Sunder Lal. He had three brothers, one of them had pre-deceased Sh. Shyam Sunder Lal. Sh.Shyam Sunder Lal died in 1938 and the estate went to the reversioners, his brother Sh. Rayu Lal and Sh. Shadi Lal.

5. By this process, Sh. Rajju Lal and Sh.Shadi Lal became owners, is a matter of admission. Sh. Rajju, Lal's wife Smt. Kela Devi died in 1963. Sh. Rajju Lal died on the 24th of March 1966. Therefore, his half, share devolved on the plaintiff Smt. Raj

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