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

1995 Supreme(All) 4

D.S.SINHA
RAJ NARAIN RAI – Appellant
Versus
SADHU RAI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J.BALLIA, L.S.SRIVASTAVA, R.P.PANDEY, U.K.MISHRA

D. S. SINHA, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal under Section 100 of the Civil P. C. 1908, hereinafter called the Code, is directed against the decree and judgment dt. 22nd Oct. 1973 passed by the 1st (Temporary) Civil and Sessions Judge, Ballia in Civil Appeal No. 22 of 1972, Sadhu Rai v. Raj Narain Rai whereby the decree and judgment dt. 7th Mar. , 1972 passed by the Munsif, Ballia West in Original Suit No. 369 of 1967 has been modified.

( 2 ) TO buttress its conclusion leading to the impugned decree and judgment, the first appellate Court has, inter alia, placed reliance upon the inspection note dt. 19th Oct. , 1973 recorded on the basis of local inspection carried on 18th Oct. , 1973.

( 3 ) SRI A. K. Misra, holding brief of Sri U. K. Misra, learned counsel for the appellants, contends that the first appellate Court had no jurisdiction to make local inspection of the disputed site. According to him, such a power was vested only with the trial Court.

( 4 ) RULE 18 of the Order XVIII of the Code, as it stood on 19th Oct. , 1973, empowered the Court to inspect any property or thing concerning which any question might arise at any stage of the suit.

( 5 ) IT cannot be gainsaid that appeal is a con







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