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

1996 Supreme(Raj) 695

S.K.SHARMA
HARSHVARDHAN SINGH – Appellant
Versus
RANVEER SINGHN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
M.M.RAJAN, P.C.JAIN, PATODIA, V.B.SHARMA

Judgment


S. K. SHARMA, J.

( 1 ) PUT cauli flower in a wooden box and affix a slip of roses over it. Colour of cauli flower shall not turn into pink cauli flower shall remain cauli flower. No matter you have kept it in a box of roses. Similarly if a document creates right in the property then unless it is registered, it cannot be taken into evidence. No matter it has been reduced into writing in the name and style of fami1y settlement.

( 2 ) THIS interesting situation has arisen in this revision petition, which has been filed against the order dated 26-7-1996 passed by the Additional District Judge No. 4 Jaipur City whereby the alleged family settlement was taken on record and objections raised by the petitioner regarding admissibility of the documents were rejected.

( 3 ) IN a suit for partition filed by the plaintiff-petitioner, a document allegedly stated to be a family settlement, copy of which was available in the file of Jagir Commissioner, was summoned by the trial Court. At the time of cross-examination of Dr. Hari Singh, defendant-non-petitioner No. 14, it was contended by the counsel for the other defendant-non-petitioners that Dr. Hari Singh produced the said copy of the














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