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

2009 Supreme(P&H) 1387

SHAM SUNDER
Umed Singh Dahiya Son Of Shri Bal Kishan – Appellant
Versus
Balwan Singh S/o Bal Kishan – Respondent


JudgmentJudgment

Sham Sunder, J.

1. This Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 17.09.2003, rendered by the Court of Additional District Judge, Sonepat, vide which it accepted the appeal against the judgment and decree dated 17.02.2003, rendered by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sonepat.

2. Shorn off unnecessary details, the facts relevant for the decision of the case, are that the house, in dispute, as fully detailed, in the plaint, was purchased by Bal Kishan, father of the parties, vide registered sale deed dated 16.10.1958. He executed a Will dated 06.12.1988 be queathing the house, in dispute, in favour of the plaintiff (now appellant). It was stated that after the death of Bal Kishan, the plaintiff (now appellant) became the owner of the house, in dispute. It was further stated that the defendant (now respondent) was living in a portion of the house. It was further stated that the defendant was many a time, asked to hand over the possession of a portion of the house, which he was occupying, but to no avail. On his final refusal, left with no alternative, a suit for possession, was filed.

3. The defendant, put in appearance, and con




































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