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

1960 Supreme(MP) 132

N.M.GOLVALKER, K.L.PANDEY
Pilanoni Janakram – Appellant
Versus
Anandsingh Sakhakam – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: A.P. Sen
For Respondents/Defendant: R.K. Verma

JUDGMENT

K.L. Pandey, J.

The unsuccessful Plaintiff appeals against the dismissal of her suit for declaration of her title to, and possession of, 7.29 acres of land, rental Rs. 3-8-0, more particularly described in schedule A of the plaint.

The undisputed facts are these. One Dauram was the thekadar gaontia of village Suwatal. He died leaving behind him surviving 3 sons, Baijnath, Raghunath and Sukhiram. Prior to the year 1915, there was a partition amongst the 3 sons. The disputed bhogra land was allotted to Raghunath, who subsequently obtained a separate settlement parcha in respect of that land assessed to Rs. 2-12-0 as rent. Raghunath and after him his son Anjorsingh remained in separate possession of the land till 1942 when the latter died. The land was then recorded in the name of Mst. Sukbmat, widow of Anjorsingh, and she remained in possession thereof till her death on 18 May 1949. Thereupon, Anand-singh (Defendant), grandson of Baijnath, who was the then thekadar gaontia of the village, applied for mutation of his name as holder of the bhogra land on the ground that the last holder had died without heirs. The objection raised by the Plaintiff, who is one of the four daughters


















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