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

2018 Supreme(P&H) 2989

ANIL KSHETARPAL
Parshotam Lal Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Subhash Chand Sharma – Respondent


Advocates Appeaerd:Mr. C.B.Goel, Advocate, for the appellant.
Mr. H.R.Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the respondent.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Anil Kshetarpal, J.:- Plaintiff-appellant is in the regular second appeal against the judgments passed by the courts below, dismissing his suit for mandatory injunction directing the defendant to deliver the vacant possession of House nos.6034, 6034/1, 6034/2 and 6034/A, Machi Mohalla, Ambala Cantt/Ambala Sadar and for recovery of Rs.36800/- as compensation/damages for use and occupation of the building @ Rs.1500/- per month till the date of delivery of possession and future interest.

2. Undisputed facts are that Smt. Daya Wanti, mother of both the parties purchased the property on 18.09.1974. Both the brothers, namely the plaintiff and the defendant were living along with the mother. Smt. Daya Wanti executed a registered Will dated 29.03.1993 in favour of the plaintiff-appellant. After the death of Smt. Daya Wanti, plaintiff filed a suit for mandatory injunction directing the defendant to hand over vacant possession of the portion which was in the possession of the defendant.

3. Defendant contested the suit and pleaded that mother has never executed any Will in favour of the plaintiff. It may be significant to note here that the defendant had previously filed a suit fo

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