Back
ROBIN PHUKAN
Biva Kakati, W/o Late Krishna Narayan Kakati – Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Ch. Das, S/o. Surendra Ch. Das – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Robin Phukan, J.)
Heard Mr. C. Sharma, learned counsel for the appellants and also heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. This regular second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, is directed against the judgment dated 27.09.2016 and decree dated 30.09.2016 passed in Title Appeal No.10/2015 by the learned Civil Judge, Bongaigaon. It is to be noted here that vide impugned judgment dated 27.09.2016 and decree dated 30.09.2016, the learned Civil Judge, Bongaigaon, has upheld the judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No.44/2007 by the learned Munsiff, North Salmara, Abhayapuri.
3. The back grounds facts leading to filing of the present appeal is briefly stated as under:-
Concurrent findings of fact by the Trial Court and First Appellate Court are binding and cannot be interfered with under Section 100 of the CPC.
The court upheld the lower courts' findings, emphasizing the limited scope of re-appreciating evidence in second appeals under Section 100 CPC.
The court held that a title deed must be substantiated with clear evidence, and the Survey Commissioner's findings are critical in resolving land disputes.
Proper identification of property ownership is essential in disputes, and prior deeds must reflect accurate details to establish rightful title.
The court affirmed the principle that established boundaries take precedence over conflicting land titles, and concurrent factual findings by lower courts are upheld unless proven manifestly erroneou....
The Appellate Court must consider the Trial Court's reasoning and evidence when reversing a decree, as mandated by Order 41 Rule 31 of the CPC.
The settlement order, revenue records, and lack of evidence supporting adverse possession claims were crucial in establishing the plaintiffs' continuous possession and defeating the defendants' claim....
The BPPHT Act's provisions, particularly Section 18, bar civil suits challenging settlement orders unless fraud or jurisdictional issues are proven, emphasizing the finality of administrative decisio....
A plaintiff can amend a suit to specify claims based on substantial evidence. Courts must consider all relevant claims and evidence to prevent erroneous dismissal.
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
