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

2024 Supreme(Raj) 322

BIRENDRA KUMAR
Bhagwan Kaur W/o Sh. Inder Singh – Appellant
Versus
Lrs of Smt. Chandrawati widow Late Sh. Prabhu Singh – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. BM Aggarwal
For the Respondent: Mr. SL Jain, Mr. Abhinav Jain

JUDGMENT :

Birendra Kumar, J.

1. The original plaintiff/appellant late Bhagwan Kaur had brought the suit for a decree of specific performance of agreement to sale, the referred immovable property in pursuance of agreement to sale between the parties dated 24.07.1979 (Ex.1). In the alternative, prayer was for direction to the respondents to refund the part consideration money of Rs.35,000/-along with damages of Rs.35,000/-. Learned trial judge has granted alternative relief above by the impugned judgment and decree dated 19.01.1995 passed by the learned District Judge No.2, Hanumangarh in Civil Suit No.10/1985 (21/82). The plaintiff/appellant is not satisfied with the decree, hence this appeal.

2. The case and claim of the plaintiff is that the original defendant-Smt. Chandrapati and her three sons including two minors through their guardian-Smt. Chandrapati, had executed the aforesaid agreement to sale Chak No.10, HMH T.P. 149/ 264, Kila No.1 to 25 area 12 and half bigas out of total 25 bighas of land. It is not controverted that the said property was khatedari agricultural land of Prabhu Singh acquired through patta and after death of Prabhu Singh, the defendants had succeeded the s

            Click Here to Read the rest of this document
            1
            2
            3
            4
            5
            6
            7
            8
            9
            10
            11
            Judicial Analysis

            None of the listed cases explicitly indicate that they have been overruled, reversed, or treated as bad law. There are no keywords such as "overruled," "reversed," "criticized," or "disapproved" present in the descriptions provided. Therefore, based solely on the given information, no case is identified as bad law.

            [Followed]

            None of the cases explicitly mention subsequent treatment that indicates they are considered good law or have been followed. The descriptions are standalone legal principles without references to their judicial treatment.

            [Distinguished or Clarified]

            The case L. I. C. of India VS Ram Pal Singh - 2010 2 Supreme 444 states, "Mere admission of document in evidence does not amount to its proof." This is a legal principle that is well-established and likely referenced or clarified in subsequent judgments, but no direct indication of such treatment is provided here.

            [Legal Principles and Clarifications]

            Rangammal VS Kuppuswami - 2011 4 Supreme 227: Discusses the burden of proof regarding transactions involving minors and guardianship, which is a standard principle in property and guardian law.

            Kammana Sambamurthy (D) By LRs. VS Kalipatnapu Atchutamma (D) - 2010 7 Supreme 171: Explains the inheritance rights of an only son and the subsequent succession of the mother, stating a clear legal principle regarding ancestral property and intestate succession.

            Baldev Singh VS Manohar Singh - 2006 5 Supreme 943: Emphasizes the liberal approach courts should take in granting amendments to pleadings, including raising plea of limitation and raising inconsistent pleas. This indicates a procedural principle that courts generally favor allowing amendments unless serious injustice occurs.

            All cases appear to be stating legal principles or rules without explicit reference to their subsequent judicial treatment. Without explicit references to subsequent cases, citations, or treatment, the treatment status remains unclear. Therefore, I categorize all as uncertain regarding their treatment history.

            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