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

1993 Supreme(Ori) 329

G.B.PATNAIK
HALADHAR MAJHI – Appellant
Versus
BALARAM MAJHI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
M. Patra, for the Appellant; B. Patnaik, G.N. Mohanty and B.K. Panda, for the Respondent

JUDGMENT :

G.B. Pattnaik, J. - Plaintiff is the appellant against a reversing judgment. Plaintiff filed the suit for partition and allotment of his one-fourth share and sought for relief u/s 4 of the Partition Act to re-purchase the undivided ancestral property from defendant No. 8 with respect to Schedule -Kha property. Plaintiff's case, in brief, is that plaintiff and defendants 1 to 7 are descendants of the common ancestor Banamaii and defendant No. 8 is a stranger to the family. Defendant No. 8 got a registered sale deed in respect of the undivided ancestral homestead property from defendant No. 1 on 14-2-1978 in respect of Schedule-Khar property of the plaint which comprises of a part of the residential house and the tank appurtenant thereto and the plaintiff is entitled to protection of Section 4 of the Partition Act.

2. The defendants contested the suit challenging the share- claimed by the plaintiff and it was further contended that though defendant No. 1 had sold his share of homestead to defendant No. 8 on 14-2-1978, but defendant No. 8 had re-conveyed the same in favour of defendant No. 1 on 21-4-1978 on receiving the consideration money of Rs. 2,000/- and, therefore, the














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