Anil Kujur vs Ciril @ Mandu Kujur - 2011 Supreme(Jhk) 769

Breaking News

Back Next

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2011 Supreme(Jhk) 769

N.N.TIWARI
Anil Kujur – Appellant
Versus
Ciril @ Mandu Kujur – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared
For the Appellants :Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondents: None

Headnote: Read headnote

JUDGMENT

This is the plaintiffs’ second appeal, who lost suit for prtition in two courts below.

2. The parties are by caste Oraon and are members of Scheduled Tribes. Hindu Law is not applicable to them. There is no presumption of jointness of the family members.

3. Partition Suit no.165 of 2002 was filed by the plaintiffs in the court of Subordinate Judge at Ranchi, seeking decree for partition of their half share in the suit. The case of the plaintiffs is that the plaintiffs and defendants are joint. The plaintiffs have got half share in the suit property. They requested for partition of their share, but the defendants refused. Hence the suit.

4. The defendants contested the suit. According to the defendants, the suit lands are not joint properties. The Revisional Survey Record of Rights recorded exclusive possession of the parties. The parties were all along separate in mess and residence. The persons, who were shown in possession of respective land, were in peacef

Click Here to Read the rest of this document