B.K.CHATURVEDI, M.HIDAYATULLAH, T.P.NAIK
LUKAI, KATIKRAM – Appellant
Versus
NIRANJAN DAYARAM – Respondent
( 2 ) THE suit had a chequered career in the Courts below, the trial Court dismissing it and the first appellate Court decreeing it. According to the first appellate Court, there was no proof of legal necessity nor was any case set up to prove it. The learned appellate Judge, therefore, decreed the plaintiffs claim. The two defendants thereupon appealed.
( 3 ) DURING the pendency of this appeal the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (Act No. XXX Of 1956) came to be passed. The learned counsel for the appellants therefore abandoned the original case, knowing that the second appeal was concluded by a finding of fact. He based his case
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.