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

2011 Supreme(Jhk) 247

D.N.PATEL
Satlal Mahto – Appellant
Versus
Rudlal Mahto – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the petitioner: Mr. Birendra Kumar.
For the Respondents: Mr. Suchendra Prasad.

Order

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that an application for amendment in the plaint was preferred by the petitioner, who is the original plaintiff and partly the said application was allowed and partly it was rejected. Paragraphs vi to x of the amendment application was not allowed to be amended and, them fore, the present petition has been preferred. Paragraphs vi to x of the amendment application are as under:--

"(vi) After paragraph 15, a sub para "15A" be added as follows:

15A. That so far as the lands of Khata No. 48 are concern, the father of the defendant has received compensation amount also awarded in L.R. Case No. 26/83 for acquisition of the land (for Bazar Samittee) measuring 1.93 Acres (Khata, No. 48) consisting of plot no. 2143, Area 1.75 Acres and plot no. 2145 Area 0.18 Acre. Hence, the lands measuring 1.93 Acres should be deducted from the share of the defendants.

In addition to the above lands, the lands measuring 0.50 Acre under Khata No. 48 has been sold by defendants and their persons. Hence, this much area should also be deducted from their share.

Thus, the suit lands under Khata No. 48, Area 19.25 Acres after deducting the area 2.43 Acres




























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