VINEY MITTAL
Mangilal Ratanlalji Patidar – Appellant
Versus
Dambarlal Ratanlalji Patidar – Respondent
2. The plaintiffs had filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction claiming absolute ownership of the suit property by alleging that the property in question had fallen to their exclusive share on a family partition. For the aforesaid purposes, the plaintiffs have relied upon an affidavit dated February 9, 2002.
3. The suit is being contested by the defendant No.1 - Dambarlal. During the course of evidence of the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs wanted to produce the aforesaid affidavit on record, which was objected by the defendant No.1 on the ground that the said document was a relinquishment deed. It was claimed that the said affidavit was compulsorily required to be registered and having not been so registered, could not be admissible in evidence. Vide order dated Decemb
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.