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

1990 Supreme(All) 603

K.K.BIRLA
JAI PRAKASH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U P – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.K.SRIVASTAVA, N.C.RAJVANSHI, N.N.Singh, Raj Kumar Jain, V.M.Zaidi,

K. K. BIRLA, J.

This revisions arises out of the order passed on 8th December, 1987 allowing the criminal revision and dropping the proceeding under Section 145, Cr. P. C. passed by the VI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar.

2. Ths necessary facts leading to this revision may be narrated :-

One Kripa Ram was the bhumidhar of the plots Nos. 84, 516 and 514 situate in village Rohana Kalan. According to Jai Prakash and Shyam Lal, the present revisionists, Kripa Ram agreed to sell these plots to them by agreement to sell dated 27th November, 1976. By sale-deed dated 5th February, 1987 Kripa Ram sold those plots in favour of Ashok Kumar and others, the present opposite parties Nos. 2 to 13 (here in after referred as the second party ). By application dated 20-2-87 the present revisionists initiated the proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P. C. against the second party. The preliminary order in the case was passed on 28-3-87. Vide plaint dated 29-1-87 the present revisionists had already filed a suit for specific performance against Kripa Ram for specific performance of the afore said agreement. By the impugned order dated 4th August, 1987 the S. D. M. had ordered the atta















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