Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
VIKAS BAHL
Jai Narain (since deceased) through his LRs. – Appellant
Versus
Haryana Ware Housing Corporation – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIKAS BAHL, J.
INDEX
| Paras | Pages | |
| Challenge in the present appeals | 1-2 | 2 |
| Arguments on behalf of the plaintiff | 3-9 | 2-8 |
| Arguments on behalf of the defendant | 10 | 8-9 |
| Rebuttal on behalf of the plaintiff | 11-12 | 9-11 |
| Analysis and Findings | 13-46 | 11-38 |
1. Present order would dispose of two appeals arising from the same judgments. Regular Second Appeal No.557 of 1992 has been filed by the defendant-The Haryana Ware Housing Corporation in which challenge is to the judgment and decree dated 28.02.1987 vide which the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff/Jai Narain had been decreed. Challenge in the said appeal is also to the judgment dated 17.12.1991 vide which the appeal filed by the defendant-The Haryana Ware Housing Corporation had been dismissed with slight modification/observations which were made in para 9 of the said judgment by the 1st Appellate Court. Regular Second Appeal No.1055 of 1992 has been filed by the plaintiff-Jai Narain in which challenge is to the judgment of the 1st Appellate Court dated 17.12.1991 to the extent that observations had been made in the last part of para 8 and para 9 of the judgment and the judgment of the trial Court had been slightly modified. Thus, in the said appe
Appellate Court may permit additional evidence to be produced whether oral or documentary, if conditions mentioned in Order 41 Rule 27 are satisfied.
The court discussed the legal principles related to the jurisdiction of the court to interfere with concurrent findings of fact and law.
In second appeals under Section 100 CPC, High Court cannot disturb concurrent findings of fact on demarcation report validity absent perversity or substantial question of law.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on the Advocate Commissioner's report to determine the extent of encroachment and ownership of the disputed property.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on evidence such as the Advocate Commissioner's report, sale-deeds, and the FMB sketch to confirm encroachment and shortage of land, a....
[The court established that the burden of proof lies on the defendant to substantiate claims of ownership or tenancy, and failure to do so, coupled with admissions against interest, can lead to a jud....
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
