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

1986 Supreme(Raj) 573

N.M.KASLIWAL
Amir Chand – Appellant
Versus
Harji Ram – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Mr. R.K. Mathur, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. P.C. Jain, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This revision is directed against the order of learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Kishangarh as dated 30th May, 1986.

2. On the basis of the pleadings on the parties the trial Court framed 7 issues out of which issues No. 2 and 4 reads as under : ..........

3. The petitioner has submitted before the trial Court that the above mentioned 2 issues should be treated as preliminary issues. Learned trial Court by the impugned order dismissed the above prayer of the petitioner.

4. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that under Section 46 of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950, thee is bar to file any suit with regard to any evacuee property. It is contended that the property in question has already been declared as evacuee property and in that regard the petitioner has filed a number of documents before the trial Court. It has been submitted that the case itself can be disposed of on the basis of issue No. 2 as well as issue No. 4 which relates to res-judicata. On the other hand, Mr. Jain contended that the trial Court was right in giving a direction that the above 2 issues should also be decided







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