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

2007 Supreme(P&H) 1596

VINOD K.SHARMA
Matto – Appellant
Versus
Naino – Respondent


Judgment

Vinod K.Sharma, J.

1. This regular second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned District Judge, Ferozepur accepting the appeal partly and modifying the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court.

2. The plaintiff-appellants filed a suit on the plea that Raman son of Haku son of Vir Singh was owner of the land measuring 101 kanals 13 marlas as detailed in the plaint. The plaintiffs claimed that they being Hindus were governed by Mitakshra School of Hindu Law and were governed by Hindu Succession Act in the matters of succession. It was claimed that said Raman son of Haku died in 1972 leaving behind two sons namely Mehtab Singh and Gulab Singh and five daughters. It was claimed that since he died after 1956 all his sons and daughters were entitled to inherit the property left by him in equal shares. Mehtab Singh and Gulab Singh sons of Raman, however, got the mutation of inheritance sanctioned in their favour fraudulently and mis- stating the true facts before the Revenue Officer. The said mutations were also challenged being illegal and ineffective on the rights of the plaintiffs. Gulab Singh also died and he was succeeded by















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