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

1985 Supreme(Ori) 68

R.C.PATNAIK
MURALIDHAR – Appellant
Versus
BANSIDHAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
N.K.ACHARYA, R.C.RATH, S.Mishra

R. C. PATNAIK, J.


( 1 ) THE petitioner became an heir specified in Class 1 of the Schedule to the Hindu Succession Act along with opposite parties 1 to 4 in respect of certain property by virtue of intestate succession under the Act. Opposite parties 1 to 4 having transferred their interest in the property which devolved upon all of them by intestate succession, the petitioner filed an application under S. 22 of the Hindu Succession Act (for short, 'the Act') and miscellaneous case No. 250 of 1977 was registered. The Court determined the consideration at Rs. 250/ -. On 16-2-79 the Court directed opposite parties 5 to 10 to retransfer the property to the petitioner. It further directed that on failure of the opposite parties 5 to 10 to execute the sale deed, the same would be executed by the Court. The petitioner instituted a proceeding for execution of the sale deed and recovery of possession. The sale deed was executed by the Court on the default of opposite parties 5 to 10. Then the difficulty cropped up. It struck to the Court that perhaps under the provisions of S. 22 of the Act the petitioner was not entitled to the reliefs sought by way of an execution before it. It went into






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