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

1985 Supreme(HP) 13

H.S.THAKUR, V.P.BHATNAGAR
KRISHAN – Appellant
Versus
KRISHANOO – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Shri Chhabil Dass, Advocate, For the Respondent(s) Shri Devinder Gupta, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

H. S. Thakur, J.—This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the decree and judgment of the learned Single Judge dated November 9f 1973, who affirmed the decree and judgment passed by the Jearned Additional District Judge.

2. A few facts relevant to decide this appeal may be stated. The land in dispute is one-fourth share in Khasra Nos. 35, 38, 2/2, 3, 4, 53/2, 57,58/2,39, 45 and 52 measuring 43 bighas and 2 biswas situated in village Bamta. In order to understand this case, it is necessary to set out the genealogical table which gives the relationship of the parties and, to make certain observations: Balku Kahna Jalam Jagta Kalia Bhola (Mst. Phini widow) Masadi (died issueless) Lobhi Deft. 6) Negi Deft. 5) Gopal (Deft. 4) Jiwanoo (died issueless). Sardaroo Budhoo (Deft. 1) Jagarnath (Deft. 2) Anantia (Deft, 3)

3. Scot. Phini deceased made a gift of her one-fourth share in the above land in favour of Krishanoo Ram plaintiff The plaintiff applied to the revenue authorities for the partition of his one-fourth share. S/Shri Budhu, Jagarnathu and Anantia (defendants No. 1 to 3) opposed the application. Consequently, the plaintiff was directed by an order dated 31-1-1962 to get















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