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

1985 Supreme(All) 216

N.N.MITHAL
HARIHAR PANDEY – Appellant
Versus
MANGALA PRASAD SINGH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Namwar Singh, Sankatha Rai

N. N. MITHAL, J.

( 1 ) THIS execution second appeal has been filed at the instance of the judgment-debtor against an order dismissing his objections under S. 47 C. P. C. whereby removal of certain construction raised by him in violation of the decree has been ordered. The appellant has raised several questions of law.

( 2 ) IN order to appreciate appellants submission the necessary facts need be grasped first. The parties own adjoining land with a passage running from west to east between their properties. When the defendant started raising construction over his land the plaintiff apprehended obstruction to his passage. Consequently the suit was filed. The plaintiff secured an interim injunction restraining any further construction activity. Within two months of this order the parties filed a compromise petition and in terms thereof a decree was passed making the compromise petition as part of the decree. This petition consists of three parts. Para ka is a sort of preamble to the dispute and the properties are described therein with reference to the Commissioners map. Its contents are not relevant for our present purposes. According to para kha the defendant, in lieu of the existing






















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