Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
D.DASH
Trinath Gouda – Appellant
Versus
Krishna Chandra Patnaik – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's jurisdiction in the appeal process. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. plaintiff's standing based on ownership history. (Para 3) |
| 3. defendants' claim and basis for possession. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. arguments against the first appellate court’s decision. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 5. court's review of evidence and judgments. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 6. rightful ownership and evidence evaluation. (Para 10) |
| 7. final ruling in favor of the defendants. (Para 11) |
JUDGMENT :
The Appellant, in this Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘the Code’), has assailed the judgment and decree 22.05.1989 and 22.06.1989 respectively passed by the learned 2ND Additional District Judge, Berhampur in T.A. No.98 of 1988 (T.A. No.33/84 GDC).
During pendency of that First Appeal, the Defendant No.2, who had been arraigned therein as Respondent No.2, having died, his legal representatives have come on record and they are the Respondent Nos.2(a) to 2(d).
2. For the sake of convenience, in order to avoid confusion and bring in clarity, the parties hereinafter have been referred to, as they have been arraigned in the Trial Court.
4. The Defendants, in their written statement, have taken the stand that the
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
