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

2024 Supreme(All) 460

ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL
Hublal – Appellant
Versus
Kalloo – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : B.K Saxena

JUDGMENT :

Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

2. Despite the service of notice, no one appears on behalf of the respondents.

3. Present appeal has been filed against the judgement and decree dated 13.10.1992 passed by the Court of 11th Additional District Judge, Lucknow, in Civil Appeal No.22/92, Sri Ram Versus Hublal and another allowing the appeal of the defendant/respondent no.2 and dismissing the suit for specific performance of a contract of the plaintiff/appellant vide regular suit no.284/88 Hub Lal Versus Kalloo and another dated 24.12.92 by the Court of Munsif Hawali, Lucknow on the following amongst others.

4. This second appeal was admitted on the following substantial question of law:

    (1) Whether the learned Appellate Court below has committed manifest error of law in applying the provisions of Section-168-A of Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1950') to the facts of the case?

5. The crux of the matter is that a registered agreement to sell was executed by respondent no.1 in favour of the appellant on 22.07.1986 regarding two biswa land in Khasra No.671, Village-Dehwa, Post-Moha

    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