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

2001 Supreme(HP) 30

K.C.SOOD
CHAUDHARY – Appellant
Versus
AJUDHIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Rakesh Jaswal, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. J.R. Thakur, Advocate, for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

Kuldip Chand Sood, J.—The judgment and decree of learned District Judge, Bilaspur dated April 17, 1995, is under challenge in this second appeal.

2. The facts are few and not disputed. The land subject matter of dispute, hereinafter referred to as the "disputed land" alongwith other lands was owned and possessed by Bhangi Ram to the extent of half share. The other half share was owned by Shri Chaudhary, brother of Bhangi Ram. Bhangi Ram died some where in 1955 before coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (the Act for short) leaving behind his widow Ramku. After the death of Bhangi Ram, two documents were executed between Ramku and Chaudhary on March 2, 1955. First document, (Ext. DW1/B), purports to be sale in respect of the entire share of deceased Bhangi Ram in favour of Chaudhary by Ramku. Second document (Ext. DW1/A), purports to be an agreement, by which Chaudhary left 12 bighas 1 biswas of land out of the share of deceased Bhangi, for the maintenance of Ramku. It was stipulated in the agreement that Ramku will have life interest in this land and Chaudhary will be entitled to its possession after her death.

3. Ramku filed the suit, out of which this appeal
















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