Back
ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA
Ram Narayan Rajbhor, S/o. Late Durbali Rajbhor – Appellant
Versus
Geeta Ghosh @ Geeta Kalita, W/o. Late Ram Prasad Ghosh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. S.P. Roy, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. R. Ali, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The appellant Ram Narayan Rajbhor instituted Title Suit No. 76/2006 against the respondents Geeta Ghosh, Ashok Ghosh and Gunu Ghosh where Geeta Ghosh is the wife of Late Ram Prasad Ghosh and Ashok Ghosh and Gunu Ghosh respectively are son and daughter of Late Ram Prasad Ghosh.
3. In paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 respectively of the plaint it is stated as extracted :
4. That Late Ahtzamuddin Ali Ahmed vide a Registered Deed of Sale No. 1800/81 dtd. 2.3.81, had sold the said plot of land measuring 1(one) Katha
The identification of the disputed land is crucial in land disputes, and the requirement to prove a Sale Deed by examining the vendor is not applicable without a specific denial of the appellant's ri....
The presumption of due execution for registered documents under the Indian Evidence Act places the burden of proof on the party challenging the validity of such documents, and failure to provide suff....
Point of law: The principle of lis pendens is still settled principle of law. In this connection, the Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Ram Peary, AIR 1978 All 318] has considered the scope o....
The burden of proof lies with the defendant to substantiate claims over the disputed land, a failure results in dismissal of appeal.
The plaintiffs cannot claim a mere declaration of title without seeking further relief for possession, as stipulated by Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, rendering the suit not maintainable.
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
