SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Ker) 386

R.BASANT
Karamby – Appellant
Versus
A. Indira – Respondent


Judgment :-

This Civil Revision Petition is directed against an order passed by the execution court in an execution proceeding.

2. The skeletal facts first. The plaintiffs (I shall refer to the parties in the manner in which they are ranked in the original suit) asserted that the plaint ‘A’ schedule property belongs to them. To the east of the plaint ‘A’ schedule property, is a puramboke land described road/thodu puramboke. The said land is described as plaint ‘B’ schedule. The plaintiffs asserted that the plaint ‘B’ schedule property is part of a public street by name “L.G Pai Road”, situated to the east of plaint ‘A’ schedule property. The grievance of the plaintiffs was that the said ‘B’ schedule property which is part of the public street by name “L.G. Paid Road” was illegally obstructed by defendants 3 to 5 without any legal authority. The plaintiffs asserted that they have a right to enter the road from every point in their adjoining plaint ‘A’ schedule property and defendants 1 and 2 – the corporation and the government or any other person have no right to construct their access to the public road by putting up construction on the public road/by the side of the public road. T
































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top