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

2009 Supreme(Raj) 979

A.K.PUROHIT, G.K.TIWARI
Hangami – Appellant
Versus
Sodara – Respondent


Advocates Appeared
Rakesh Arora, for Appellant;
P.S. Dashora, for Respondent No1;
R.K. Gupta, Addl. G.A.

PUROHIT, M.—This is a second appeal under Section 224 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 against the judgment and decree dated 20.2.06 of Revenue Appellate Authority Ajmer passed in appeal No. 24/05/223.

2. Briefly stated, the facts leading to the second appeal are that the respondent No. 1 filed a suit under Sections 88, 89 and 188 of the Act before Sub-Divisional Officer Kekri (Ajmer) for declaration of Khatedari rights in respect of the disputed land. The trial Court decreed the suit by its judgment dated 9.5.05; aggrieved against which the appellant-defendant filed first appeal under Section 223 of the Act before Revenue Appellate Authority Ajmer who by the impugned judgment dated 20.2.06 dismissed the appeal and upheld the judgment and decree dated 9.5.05 of the trial Court. Hence the second appeal.

3. During pendency of this second appeal, the appellant filed two applications, one under Order 41 Rule 27 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code (C.P.C.) for taking on record jamabandi Svt. 2060-63 and a leaf of old account book (Bahi). Another application filed by the appellant is under Order 1 Rule 10 of the C.P.C. for impleading State Bank of India Khawas as one of the











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