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

1951 Supreme(All) 208

KIDWAI
BHAGIRATH – Appellant
Versus
AFAQ RASUL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.N.Tandon, M.M.LAL, S.Shukla

KIDWAI, J.


( 1 ) THREE brothers Aizaz Rasul, Afaq Rasul and Mushtaq Rasul owned house No. 14 in mohalla mobariz Nagar within the town of Unnao which they used as a family residential house. By a sale deed dated 13-9-1938, Aizaz Rasul sold his 1/3 share to Bhagirath. Thereafter, Aizaz Rasul delivered possession over a locked bothri inside the house to Bhagirath which naturally created difficulties in the way of the continued occupation of the house by the two other brothers and the females of their family. They accordingly left it and went to stay with the in-laws of one of them.

( 2 ) THIS state of affairs continued till 1946, when the vendee Bhagirath sued for partition of the house. The two brothers raised many pleas, one of which was that the house was the family residential house and that, therefore, they were entitled to the benefit of Section 4, Partition Act.

( 3 ) THE trial Court held that the house was dilapidated and could not be called a residential house at all, much less a family residential house. It accordingly rejected the plea under the partition act and decreed the suit for partition.

( 4 ) AFAQ Rasul and his brother appealed and the learned civil Judge of Unnao h












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