Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J
Shambhu Kumar Jain, Son Of Bimal Chand Sarawgi – Appellant
Versus
Anand Prasad, Son Of Late Surendra Prasad – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J.
Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.
2. This appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs against the Judgment dated 27.02.2017 (Decree signed on 18.03.2017) passed by learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-V, Giridih in Title Appeal No. 50 of 1989 whereby the appeal has been allowed and the judgment dated 27.01.1989 (Decree signed on 07.02.1989) passed by learned Additional Munsiff-II, Giridih in Title Suit No. 152 of 1980/94 of 1985 has been reversed.
3. The title suit was filed seeking declaration of title over the schedule B property and recovery of possession from the defendants through the process of the court. A prayer was also made for decree on account of mesne profit. The Trial Court decreed the suit and directed the defendants to hand over vacant possession of schedule B property to the plaintiffs. The Appellate Court reversed the judgement and decree.
4. This appeal has been admitted on 15.03.2024 on the following substantial questions of law: -
“(a) Whether the learned appellate court while reversing the judgment passed by the learned trial court was justified in not co
The Appellate Court must consider the Trial Court's reasoning and evidence when reversing a decree, as mandated by Order 41 Rule 31 of the CPC.
Concurrent findings of fact by the Trial Court and First Appellate Court are binding and cannot be interfered with under Section 100 of the CPC.
The first appellate court must provide points for determination and adequate reasoning when reversing a trial court's decree, as per Order 41 Rule 31 of CPC.
The court upheld the lower courts' findings, emphasizing the limited scope of re-appreciating evidence in second appeals under Section 100 CPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to plead and prove essential facts to establish adverse possession, including continuity, publicity, and hostility to the true owne....
The appellate court must independently assess evidence and reasoning of the trial court, especially in reversals, to ensure adherence to procedural mandates.
The court held that a title deed must be substantiated with clear evidence, and the Survey Commissioner's findings are critical in resolving land disputes.
Point of law: The principle of lis pendens is still settled principle of law. In this connection, the Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Ram Peary, AIR 1978 All 318] has considered the scope o....
The court affirmed the principle that established boundaries take precedence over conflicting land titles, and concurrent factual findings by lower courts are upheld unless proven manifestly erroneou....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
