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

2013 Supreme(Raj) 1865

BELA M.TRIVEDI
Gopal – Appellant
Versus
Ramdayal – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant:S.K. Gupta, Advocate.
For the Respondent No. 1:Usman Khan, Advocate.
For the Respondent No. 6:Shamshudeen Ansari, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. - The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-plaintiff under Order 43, Rule 1 of CPC challenging the order dated 24.8.11 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Hindaun City, District Karauli (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in Civil Misc. Case No. 20/11, whereby the trial court has partly allowed the application of the appellant under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 of CPC against the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 (original defendant Nos. 1 to 5) and rejected the same against the respondent No.6 (original defendant No.6).

2. The appellant-plaintiff has filed the suit seeking partition of the properties described in para No.3 of the plaint as "v"] "c"] "l"] "n" and ;, alleging interalia that the said properties were the ancestral properties. It was also alleged that the respondent No.1 had agreed to sell the property ";" out of the said properties to the respondent No.6, though the appellant had an undivided share in the same. The appellant had also filed an application seeking temporary injunction in respect of all the properties under Order 39, Rule 1 and 2 of CPC, which has been partly allowed as stated hereinabove.

3. The only contention raised by the learned counse







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