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

2006 Supreme(P&H) 2016

JASBIR SINGH
Kirpa – Appellant
Versus
Dharma – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :C.B. Goel, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Amit Jain, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Jasbir Singh, J. - Respondents No. 1 and 2 - Plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration that they along with appellant No. 1 and respondent No. 3 (defendants No. 5 and 6 respectively) were the co-owners in possession of the agricultural land, measuring 55 Kanals 15 Marlas, detail of which was given in their plaint. It was their case that they had become owners by way of adverse possession, which was continuous, hostile and open to the owners, i.e., appellants No. 2 to 5 (defendants No. 1 to 4). It was case of respondents No. 1 and 2 that they are in possession of the property in dispute along with their brothers for the last more than 100/125 years. They had been cultivating the land as owners. Their possession was open and hostile. At no time, any lease amount etc. was paid to respondents No. 2 to 5. It is an admitted fact that the parties are related to each other. To show their relationship, admitted pedigree table reads thus :

See Table Below


2. Respondents No. 1 and 2 had stated in their plaint that about 100/125 years back, due to financial hardships, Shri Ram Nath and Nand Lal, fore-fathers of respondents No. 2 to 5, left village Kavi, for ever, to settle in village Khot
























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