Back
PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
Ramesh Das S/o Lt. Benga Ram Das – Appellant
Versus
Kishore Sharma – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. R. Sarma, learned counsel representing the appellant as well as Mr. I. Alam, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. This is a Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) whereby the judgment and decree dated 23.12.2008 passed by the court of learned Civil Judge, Nalbari in Title Appeal No.10/2008, reversing the judgment and decree dated 03.09.2008 passed by the court of learned Civil Judge, (Jr. Divn.), Nalbari in Title Suit No.27/2007, is under challenge.
3. Late Satish Sarma was the owner of a plot of land measuring 2 Kathas 6 Lechas covered by K.P. Patta No.25, Dag No.15 of village Kamar Kuchi, in the Mouza of Upar Barbhag in the district of Nalbari. During his lifetime, on 28.01.1969, he sold the said land to late Bengaram Das on execution of the registered sale deed no.789/69. The possession of the land was also handed over to late Bengaram Das.
4. Subsequently, it was discovered that the aforesaid sale deed showed incorrect boundaries of the land. Therefore, late Satish Sarma executed a rectification deed no.2666/85 dated 17.05.1985 in favour of late Bengaram Das.
5. After the death of late Bengaram Das, his legal he
First appellate court judgment fail to comply with the provision of law as laid in Order 41 Rule 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Such a judgment is not sustainable in law.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory nature of compliance with the provisions of law as laid down in Order 41, Rule 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the first appell....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of complying with the provisions of law as laid down in Order 41 Rule 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which requires the appellat....
The burden of proof regarding alleged fraudulent deeds lies with the party alleging fraud, as per Section 101 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
The court emphasized the importance of proving ownership, adhering to limitation periods, and joining necessary parties in civil suits.
A party's right to present evidence on ownership must be duly recognized; failure to address critical issues of fact leads to flawed judgments.
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
