Back
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Montu Paul @ Sunil Ch Paul Chaudhury, S/o. Late Santi Ram Paul Chaudhury – Appellant
Versus
Pratima Pauland, W/o. Late Ratan Kumar Paul – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Devashis Baruah, J.)
Heard Mr. A. Z. Ahmed, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant.
2. This is an Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘the Code’) challenging the judgment and decree dated 14.05.2024 in Title Appeal No.18/2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dhubri whereby the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge, (Junior Division), Bilasipara dated 07.10.2023 in Title Suit No.114/2015 was affirmed.
3. The instant case has been taken up at the stage of Order XLI Rule 11 of the Code to ascertain as to whether there arises any substantial questions of law in terms with Section 100 (4) of the Code that can be formulated in the instant proceedings.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has proposed in the Memo of Appeal certain substantial questions of law. To ascertain as to whether those substantial questions of law can at all be formulated in the instant Appeal, this Court finds it relevant to take note of the facts leading to filing of the instant case.
5. The respondents herein as plaintiffs had instituted a suit being Title Suit No.114/2015 against the ap
The court upheld the lower courts' findings on land ownership, ruling that the plaintiffs proved their rights, and dismissed the appeal due to lack of substantial questions of law.
The sufficiency of unchallenged documentary evidence for establishing title and ownership is critical in property disputes.
The court upheld the lower courts' findings that the plaintiff proved his title and possession over the suit land, emphasizing that factual determinations cannot be disturbed without evidence of perv....
The validity of a sale deed confers title to the purchaser, and claims of permissive occupation by defendants do not negate this ownership.
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 court affirmed that the defendant failed to prove joint ownership, leading to the dismissal of the appeal for lack of substantial questions of law.
The court confirmed that adverse possession can secure title even against invalid transfer documents, provided uninterrupted possession exceeds 12 years and is public, emphasizing the significance of....
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
