Back
MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Jhalarapatan District Jhalawar – Appellant
Versus
Dalchand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiffs' claim of encroachment by defendant. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. defendant's objections to trial courts' findings. (Para 3) |
| 3. dismissal of appeal and application. (Para 4 , 7) |
| 4. court's reaffirmation of findings on evidence. (Para 5) |
| 5. civil appeal lacks substantial legal question. (Para 6) |
ORDER :
Mr. Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J. - This civil second appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 19.09.2018 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jhalawar (for brevity, "the learned Appellate Court") in Civil Appeal No.14/2016 whereby, while dismissing the appeal, the judgment dated 29.02.2016 passed by the learned Civil Judge Jhalawar (for brevity, "learned trial Court") decreeing the civil suit No.2/2007 preferred by the respondents/plaintiffs (for brevity, "plaintiffs") for mandatory and permanent injunction, has been upheld.
2. The relevant facts in brief are that the plaintiffs filed a suit for mandatory and permanent injunction against the appellant/defendant (for brevity, "the defendant") stating therein that the defendant was allotted 5 bigha of land out of Khasra No.830 for construction of market; but, in the garb of construction on the l
Evidence cannot be reappreciated in a second appeal under Section 100 CPC, and concurrent findings of lower courts are upheld unless substantial questions of law arise.
A person can seek the relief of removal of encroachments by way of a mandatory injunction in cases of encroachments on public roads or public road margins.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
