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

2023 Supreme(Raj) 2342

MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Birdhichand – Appellant
Versus
Ayodhyabai – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Ms. Akanksha Saxena, Advocate

Table of Content
1. facts of the case establish dispute over a public way. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. defendant's argument centers on lack of evidence for public way. (Para 5)
3. court affirms existence of public way based on evidence. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
4. second appeal dismissed for lack of substantial legal questions. (Para 9)

JUDGMENT :

Mr. Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J. - The civil Second appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree dated 01.05.2019 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jhalawar (for brevity, "the learned Appellate Court") in Civil Regular Appeal No.16/2013 whereby, while dismissing the appeal, the judgment dated 22.08.2013 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Jhalawar (for brevity, "the learned trial Court") decreeing the Suit No.05/2011 filed by the respondent/plaintiff (for brevity, "plaintiff") for mandatory and permanent injunction, has been affirmed.

2. The relevant facts in brief are that the plaintiff filed a suit for permanent and mandatory injunction against the appellant/defendant (for brevity, "defendant") with the averments that he wanted to encroach upon a 10 feet wide public way situated in between the plots of the part

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