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

1982 Supreme(Ori) 136

R.C.PATNAIK
SARADA DEI – Appellant
Versus
KHIROD KUMAR SAHU – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.DAGARA, M.Patra, MAHADEV MISHRA, P.C.MISHRA, R.K.MOHAPATRA, S.LATIFF, S.P.Misra, S.S.DAS

R. C. PATNAIK, J.

( 1 ) THE two appeals and the revision arise out of interlocutory proceedings in Title Suit No. 328 of 1978 pending in the court of the Subordinate Judge, First Court, Cuttack.

( 2 ) THE suit has been filed by Sarada Dei and her mother Kholia Dei, since deceased, for declaration of their title in respect of the property described in Schedules A to A/4, for invalidating the transfers effected by Krushna Chandra Behera, defendant No. 16 in favour of defendants Nos. 1 to 15, for confirmation of joint possession with defendants Nos. 16 to 24 or alternatively for recovery of possession and for permanent injunction restraining the alienees defendants 1 to 15 from interfering with the possession of the plaintiffs and defendants 16 to 20 etc. Defendants 25 to 29 as pendente lite purchasers have subsequently been added as defendants.

( 3 ) THE burden of the story of the plaintiffs appears to be that the compromise effected in Title Suit No. 26 of 1972 of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Cuttack, is not legal, valid and binding, It is stated in the plaint that the compromise petition was prepared by defendant No. 16, the son of deceased plaintiff No. 1 and brother of

























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