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

1984 Supreme(MP) 716

C.P.SEN, GULAB C.GUPTA
THAKUR PRASAD – Appellant
Versus
BHAGWANDAS – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.P.JAIN, S.S.JHA

C. P. SEN, J.

( 1 ) THIS opinion shall also govern Civil Revision No. 1784 of 1983 between the same parties. Both these revisions arise out of the same suit. The following question has been referred by the learned Single Judge for opinion of this Bench :"whether in view of the deletion of sub-rule (m) of Rule 1 of Order 43 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the Amending Act No. 104 of 1976, an appeal is competent under O. 43, R. 1-A, particularly when there is a bar to appeal under S. 96 (3) of the Code of Civil Procedure?"

( 2 ) THE parties are real brothers. Their father Dhannalal died in the year 1964 leaving behind his widow Smt. Reotibai and five sons, including the applicant and non-applicant. By agreement dated 29-1-1980, the legal representatives of Dhannalal, referred the dispute regarding the property left by the deceased to Panchas. However, due to certain opposition the Panchas could not give their award and closed the proceeding. The non-applicant then filed civil suit for possession of house No. 147. Girja Kund Ward, Seoni claiming it to be his exclusive property and it was alleged that as the applicant came on transfer, the non-applicant permitted him to stay in the ho




















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