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

1983 Supreme(All) 208

DEOKI NANDAN
BHOLA NATH – Appellant
Versus
MAHARAO RAJA SAHEB BUNDI STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.N.Singh, Ram Adhar Singh, SIDHESHWARI PRASAD

DEOKI NANDAN, J.

( 1 ) THE plaintiff-appellants in this Second Appeal claim that a pond bearing Khasra no. 1553/2 situate in Mohalla Surajkund of the city of Varanasi. was originally the sole property of the defendant. Maharao Raja Saheb Bundi State, Rajasthan. on which the plaintiff, ancestors and the plaintiff had been in possession as pattedars since the settlement of 1291 F. However, in denial of the plaintiffs right, the defendant gave a Patta for pisciculture in the said pond to one Bedi on the 2nd Dec. 1946. After obtaining the Patta. Bedi tried to dispossess the plaintiff, but was unsuccessful. We thereupon initialed a proceeding under Section 145. Cr. P. C. In respect of the pond, which was attached. but after inquiry. it was released in the plaintiffs favour and its possession was restored to the plaintiff on the 14th Dec. 1947. Bedi thereupon instituted a suit, which was decreed by the trial Court, but was dismissed on appeal by the plaintiff. Bedi filed a second appeal in this Court. That was dismissed on the Ist Dec. 1959. The plaint goes on to state that it is apparent from the aforesaid fact that Bedi could not get possession of the pond under the patta executed by t


















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