Back
HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Vishniben Kevalram Khushlani – Appellant
Versus
Bhodubhai Abhesinh Baria – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned judgment and order dated 01.02.2010 passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge, Shehera in Regular Civil Suit No.18 of 2006 as well as judgment, order and decree dated 10.02.2022 passed by the learned 6th Additional District Judge, Panchmahals in Regular Civil Appeal No.13 of 2010, the present Second Appeal is filed by the original-plaintiffs.
2. The case of the plaintiffs is that the subject parcel of land, which is allotted to one Kevalram Devaldas as an evacuee property and the same was allotted to said Kevalram Devaldas on 07.05.1974 as new tenure land. The subject parcel of land situated at village : Dhamnod of Panchmahal District bearing Revenue Survey No. 1, ad measuring 6 Accres and 9 Gunthas and subsequently, the subject parcel of land sold to the present respondent – original defendant way back in the year 1977. The said transactions was under challenge in the present Civil Suit filed by the legal heirs of the Kevalram Devaldas by way of filing the Civil Suit No.18 of 2006 in the Court of Learned Principal Civil Judge at Shehera. Learned Civil Judge has considered the written statement of other-side and applica
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a substantial question of law to be involved in a Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, emphasizing the ....
Second Appeal – Substantial question of law -condition precedent for entertaining and deciding a Second Appeal being existence of a substantial question of law, whenever a question is framed by the H....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a substantial question of law to be involved in a second appeal, as well as the limitations of the High Court's jurisdiction in....
The court emphasized the importance of proving ownership, adhering to limitation periods, and joining necessary parties in civil suits.
The court emphasized the importance of proving ownership and complying with the rules of non-joinder of parties and limitation in civil suits.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the suit was clearly barred by the law of limitation and the plaint was required to be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the C.P.C.
Point of Law : Question of law of importance to the parties was a substantial question of law entitling the appellant to a certificate under (the then) Section 110 of the Code.
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
