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

2011 Supreme(All) 3302

S.U.KHAN
PRATAP SINGH – Appellant
Versus
RAM CHARAN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.M. Garg for the Appellant; Sunil Kumar Singh and Rama Goel Bansal for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble S.U. Khan, J.—Heard Sri K.M. Garge, learned counsel for the appellant and Smt. Rama Goel Bansal, learned counsel for the respondent caveator at the admission stage.

2. This is defendant’s Second Appeal arising out of O.S. No. 469 of 1999 instituted by plaintiff respondent. The suit was decreed in part by Additional Civil Judge (S.D.). Court No. 2 Mathura through judgment and decree dated 25.7.2001 against which defendant appellant filed Civil appeal No. 156 of 2001 and plaintiff respondent filed Civil Appeal No. 15 of 2002. A.D.J. Court No. 1 Mathura, dismissed both the appeals hence this Second appeal.

3. Learned counsel for respondent on inquiry from Court stated that plaintiff respondent did not intend to file Second Appeal against the impugned judgment and decree.

4. Plaintiff respondent stated in the plaint that he and the defendant appellant entered into a partnership and each party contributed Rs. 75,000/- and the land over which partnership business was carried out belonged to the plaintiff. The relief claimed was for return of the amount of Rs. 75,000/- alongwith share of the plaintiff in the profit and return of the land alongwith damages for use and occup















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