Back
RAJENDRA M. SAREEN
Taherabibi Gulamnabi Mehsaniya – Appellant
Versus
Khairunisha Gulamnabi Gathawal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Present Second Appeal has been preferred by the appellant – original defendant against the concurrent findings of the learned Courts below arising out of the suit declaration and permanent injunction.
2. The facts as could be culled-out from the memo of the appeal are as under:
2.1 That the respondent – plaintiff filed the suit for declaration and grant of permanent injunction stating that the appellant no.1 residing with his son-in-law – opponent no.2. The respondent – plaintiff purchased the suit property from one Rashidabibi Mohamad Azam Valjiwala by a registered sale deed dated 9th September, 1998 for a sale consideration of Rs.32,000/-. As per the case of the respondent – plaintiff, the suit property was given by her mother’s father – Latifbhai Rahimbhai Rajebhai in the year 1961 and her mother sold the said property to Rasidabibi Mo. Aajam Valjiwala by registered Sale Deed dated 27th December, 1993 for consideration amount of Rs.30,000/- because her maternal uncles were not maintained her mother and thereafter Rasidabibi resided there with her family and her mother lives in rental house.
2.2 Thereafter, on 9th September, 1998 the property was purchased by respon
The importance of presenting timely and substantiated evidence to support claims, and the consequences of negligence and lack of diligence in pursuing legal remedies.
Second Appeal is competent only if it involves, at the stage of admission, substantial question of law.
Sale - Validity - Defendants were not interested or they did not try to bring their case before court and lead evidence in support of their case to with respect to sale deed being sham, bogus or frau....
The possession is a pure question of fact, and the findings of fact recorded by the lower courts cannot be interfered with unless they are based on no evidence or are perverse.
High Court in second appeal under CPC Section 100 cannot disturb concurrent findings of fact unless perverse or involving substantial question of law; co-sharer construction on joint land not ouster ....
The main legal point established is that a second appeal should not interfere with findings of fact unless they are based on no evidence or are perverse, and a suit for permanent injunction simplicit....
Concurrent findings of fact by lower courts should not be disturbed in a second appeal unless a substantial question of law arises, which was not applicable in this case.
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
