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

1934 Supreme(All) 180

BENNET
Chanar Singh Jai Ram – Appellant
Versus
Chanar Singh Jeet Singh – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Bennet, J. - This is a second appeal by the defendant, Chanar Singh, son of Jai Ram. The respondent plaintiff is also Chanar Singh, son of Jit Singh. The second appeal is against the decision of the District Judge in appeal in favour of the plaintiff who had failed in the Court of first instance. The suit was for possession. On the first hearing I remanded an issue as follows:

Has the defendant Chanar Singh acquired the title of a mortgagee by adverse possession for over 12 years o the land in suit as a mortgagee?

2. Further evidence was admitted and the lower appellate Court has come to a further finding which is to the effect that the defendant has not acquired the title of a mortgagee by adverse possession. The case has now been reargued as to whether this finding is-correct in point of law on the facts found by the learned District Judge. These facts are as follows:

In 1871 there was litigation between one Jai Ram father of Ghanar Singh, the defendant in this case (now deceased) and two men named Khim Singh and Keshar Singh. This litigation "was settled by the execution of sulehnama or deed of compromise. On 9th October 1871, Jai Earn had sued these two men and the sulehna

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