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

2006 Supreme(Jhk) 1000

N.N.TIWARI
Mahadeo Prasad Burnwal – Appellant
Versus
Atpendra Roy Choudhary – Respondent


Advocates appeared
Anil Kumar Jha, for Appellant; Arvind Kumar Choudhary, for Respondents.

JUDGMENT :- Heard the parties.

2. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 28.4.2004, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court-Ill, Deoghar in Title Appeal No. 8 of 2002 whereby the lower appellate Court has set aside the order dated 11.8.2002 passed by learned trial Court, rejecting the petition filed by the appellant-defendant No. 4 under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C.

3. The plaintiff filed suit being Title (D) Suit No. 54 of 2001 in the Court of Sub-Judge-I, Deoghar praying relief for declaration that the plaintiff is a co-owner and has a preemptory right to purchase the suit property and for permanent injunction, restraining the defendants from transferring the suit property or from altering the status of the property.

4. The case of the plaintiff was that the plaintiff and the defendants are co-owners of the joint property being Plot Nos.196, 197 and 207 (part) also numbered as Town Plot No. 1401, measuring 4 Kattha, 10 Dhur, equivalent to 0.26 acre. The said land was acquired by Rohini Estate and was settled with Haldhar Mishra. Said Haldhar Mishra came in possession of the said land and constructed a Pucca building and started living therein.






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