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

1953 Supreme(All) 258

BRIJ MOHAN LALL
Ram Lakhan – Appellant
Versus
Tulsha widow of Mata Prasad – Respondent


Advocates:
Harnandan Prasad and Yashoda Nandan, for Appellant; B.N. Sapru, G.P. Bhargava and N.D. Ojha, for Respondents.

ORDER :- This is an application in revision by a defendant against whom a suit for possession instituted under S. 9, Specific Relief Act has been decreed by the learned Munsif of Gyanpur, district Banaras.

2. The plaint allegations, which have been found to be correct by the learned Munsif, are that the plaintiffs (opposite parties 1 and 2) were in peaceful possession of the land in dispute but they were, without their consent and otherwise than in due course of law, dispossessed therefrom by the applicant and other persons who were impleaded in the Court below as co-defendants and who are arrayed in this revision as opposite parties 3 to 6. These findings of fact have to be accepted as correct in these proceedings.

3. The only question of law that arises for decision is whether the suit was time-barred. In order to appreciate this question, it is necessary to mention certain facts. The plaintiffs dispossession took place on 12-7-1949. The suit was instituted in the Munsifs Court on 21-12-1949. On 3-4-1950 the plaint was ordered to be returned for presentation to "proper Court" by which term was meant the revenue Court. The plaint was actually returned on the nest day, i.e. on 4-4-19


















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