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

2008 Supreme(All) 660

POONAM SRIVASTAVA
BAIJ NATH RAM (DEAD) – Appellant
Versus
SONMATI – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Sankatha Rai and Purshottam Upadhyay for the Appellants; Smt. Swati Agrawal for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Mrs. Poonam Srivastava, J.—Heard Sri Sankatha Rai and Sri Purshottam Upadhyay, learned Counsels for the appellants and Smt. Swati Agrawal Advocate for the contesting respondents.

2. Second appeal No. 229 of 2007 arises out of original suit No. 96 of 1987, Baij Nath & Ors. v. Sonmati & Anr., which was dismissed on 1-10-1991 by the Additional Munsif Mohammadabad, Ghazipur. Civil appeal No. 242 of 1991, Baij Nath Ram & Ors. v. Sonmati & Anr., was preferred against the aforesaid judgment.

3. Second appeal No. 230 of 2007 arises out of Civil Suit No. 88 of 1987, Ramesh Bhar and Sonmati v. Baij Nath and Ram Chandar, which was decreed, against which regular appeal was filed vide Civil Appeal No. 243 of 1991, Baij Nath Bhar v. Ramesh Bhar & Ors. Both the appeals were dismissed by a common judgment dated 12-9-2006. Common evidence was led in both the cases as such both the second appeals are being decided together.

4. Record was summoned before the appeals were admitted, an interim order was granted in favour of the appellants. The suit instituted by the contesting respondents was for a decree for demolition against the appellants and for removal of unauthorized construction si












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