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

2010 Supreme(Jhk) 486

N.N.TIWARI
Santosh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Purnima Kumari – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Himanshu Kumar Mehta, Ms. Manjusri Patra, Pankaj Kumar.

Order

This second appeal is by the defendant No. 2-appellant-appellant against whom decree was passed by learned trial court. He filed appeal against the said decree. The same has been dismissed, upholding the same.

2. The plaintiffs filed suit for declaration of their right, title and interest over the suit land and also for declaration that the deed of cancellation of sale deed bearing No. 10658/1998 and the deed of gift bearing No. 10659/1998 have not affected the plaintiffs right, title and interest in the said land.

3. The plaintiffs' case was that the land appertaining to Khata No. 26 of Village Sudna, P.S.-Daltonganj, District-Palamau was recorded in the names of Thakur Dayal Mahto, Bharosa Mahto and Runan Mahto all sons of Ratan Mahto in the last survey and settlement record. The three recorded tenants had partitioned the land of Khata No. 26 in equal share. The total area of Plot No. 376 was 14 decimals and the same was allotted to the share of Thakur Dayal Mahto. Thakur Dayal Mahto died leaving behind his only son Falu Mahto. He came in peaceful exclusive possession of the said land of Plot No. 376. Falu Mahto also died leaving behind his sons Tulsi Mahto and Panchu Mahto. T












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