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

1982 Supreme(All) 40

T.S.MISRA
Krishna Chandra – Appellant
Versus
Kaneez Fatima – Respondent


ORDER : - The plaintiff-revisionists filed a Civil Suit No. 166 of 1961 in the Court of Munsif Havali, Lucknow claiming partition of the house in dispute alleging that they were the owners of 2/3rd share in the said house and the defendants-opposite-parties were owners of the remaining one-third share (therein. A preliminary decree for partition was passed by the trial Court on 1st December, 1964. The plaintiffs applied on 4th March, 1965 for making a final decree for partition. Consequently, a Commissioner was appointed to determine the valuation of the house in dispute. According to the opinion of the Commissioner the valuation of the house was Rs. 10.245/-. Smt. Mehrunnissa filed an application under S.4 of the Partition Act praying that she be permitted to purchase the share of the plaintiffs on payment of the value of their share in the house in suit according to the valuation determined by the Commissioner. Smt. Mehrunnissa had also filed an objection against the report of the Commissioner. The learned Munsif Havali, Lucknow by his order dated 28th October, 1967, disposed of the objections raised against the Commissioners report as well as the application under Section 4 of 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