Back
HARKESH MANUJA
Bhupinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
Ravinder Kaur – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiffs claim ownership via mortgage. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. additional evidence needed for appeal. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. first appellate court's oversight on evidence application. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. case remanded for reconsideration and additional evidence. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. instructions for parties to reappear in court. (Para 13 , 14) |
Judgment
Mr. Harkesh Manuja, J.
By way of present regular second appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment and decree dated 29.05.2012 passed by the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Amritsar, affirmed vide judgment dated 27.11.2013 passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Amritsar, whereby a suit for declaration claiming ownership, filed at the instance of plaintiffs/appellants (hereinafter referred to as plaintiffs) stands dismissed.
2. Briefly stating, facts of the case as pleaded in the plaint are that one Tehal Singh was owner of suit property mentioned in the plaint who mortgaged 1/4th out of it vide registered mortgage deed dated 20.03.1957 in favour of Harbans Singh i.e. the father of plaintiffs No.1 and 3 as well as in favour of grandfather of plaintiff No.2. As per the plaint, the land was never got red
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
