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

1983 Supreme(All) 322

N.N.MITHAL
LAL BAHADUR SINGH AND ANR. – Appellant
Versus
BAGESARA AND ORS. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.N.Singh, Sankatha Rai

N. N. MITHAL, J.


( 1 ) AT the very outset, I may dispose of an application for permission to file additional evidence in appeal. The document which is sought to be brought on record may be relevant on the merits of the controversy but has no relevance for the decision of the appeals before me which only involve question of jurisdiction. In the circumstances, the application is dismissed and the document be returned to the defendant-appellant.

( 2 ) ACCORDING to the plaintiffs allegations, the land in dispute was fixed rate tenancy of their mother prior to the abolition of Zamindari. On her death, the plaintiffs became her sole heirs. On 1-12-1946, a registered agreement was executed between the plaintiffs father and the defendants according to which the defendants were permitted to plant some trees over the land and the produce and the wood thereof was to be shared amongst them equally. After the Zamindari abolition, the plaintiffs claimed to have become Bhumidhars of the land. As the defendants had failed to pay plaintiffs share in the produce, a decree for Rupees 1,100/- and a declaration that they were the Bhumidhars of the land and that revenue entry in defendants favour was in













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