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

2019 Supreme(Guj) 142

A.S.SUPEHIA
NANDLAL RANCHHODBHAI PATEL – Appellant
Versus
MAGAN BHARATBHAI PATEL – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Jitendra M Patel, Adv., Vishal C Mehta, Adv.

JUDGMENT

A.S. SUPEHIA, J.

1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree dated 04.12.1986 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Karjan in Regular Civil Suit No.189 of 1881, the appellants-original defendants have preferred present appeal, whereby the Civil Judge held that the defendants-original appellants herein has no right to make any construction on the eastern side of the property within 12 feets and the defendants-original appellants herein should have remove the pillars and slat covered within 12 ft.

2. The brief facts leading to filing of the present appeal are as under:-

2.1 It is the case of the respondents-original plaintiffs that they are staying in the same street of village:Kandari, Ta:Karjan. The respondents are in the ownership and possession of the suit property situated on easter side. It is stated that the appellants had applied for construction to the Kandari Gram Panchayat and accordingly, the order was passed granting permission for construction on 01.03.1978. At the same time, it is averred that the Kandari Gram Panchayat has permitted the appellants to construct suit-gabhan beyond 32 ft. towards east-west side. The appellants were permit













































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