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

2012 Supreme(Jhk) 238

R.R.PRASAD
Chandra Kala Devi – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Indrajit Sinha.
For the State: A.P.P.
For the O.P. No.2: Mr. Birat Kumar.

ORDER

Heard the parties.

2. This application is directed against the order dated 19.4.2011 passed by the then Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in Complaint Case No. 1470 of 2010, whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offences under Sections 467, 468, 469, 471, 420 and 120B of Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioners.

3. Before adverting to the submission advanced on behalf of the parties, case of the complainant needs to be taken notice of which is as follows:-

One Shakuntala Sharma wife of Sheo Kumar Sharma, during her lifetime had purchased the property, in question, in the year 1980 through a registered sale-deed. Said Shakuntala Sharma and her husband had let out that house to different tenants on monthly rent. When Sheo Kumar Sharma and his wife Shakuntala Sharma died leaving behind Smt. Shakti Sharma as sole heir, Smt. Shakti Sharma let out said house to the complainant, in whose favour a power of attorney has been executed, by her and also to petitioner no. 2-Sidh Nath Singh on monthly rental. However, said Sidh Nath Singh in course of time when asked the complainant to vacate the said house on the plea that he had purchased that house, the complainant informed ab














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