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

2017 Supreme(MP) 1024

VIVEK RUSIA
GORDHAN – Appellant
Versus
DINESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Shri B.I. Mehta, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Shri Nitin Phadke, Advocate.

ORDER :

Vivek Rusia, J.

This petition has been filed by defendant no. 1 being aggrieved by the order dated 18-02-2016 passed by the Civil Judge, Class-I, Badnawar, Dist. Dhar, by which the Court has held that the documents dated 01-11-1985 is inadmissible in evidence for want of registration.

2. The facts of the case are that on 29-07-2011, the plaintiff/respondent no. 1 has filed a suit for permanent injunction, possession against the present petitioner on the ground that they are the owner of the disputed agricultural land being survey no. 194 area 1.682 hectors and the defendant/petitioner be restrained from interfering in their possession. During pendency of the suit, the plaintiffs were dispossessed, therefore, by way of amendment, they sought decree of possession.

3. The petitioner defendant filed a written statement denying the averments made in the plaint contending that on 01-11-1985, father of the plaintiff nos. 1 to 3 and husband of respondent no. 4 Late Champalalji has sold the disputed land to the petitioner for consideration of Rs. 15,000/- and executed an agreement and handed over the possession to him. Along with written statement, the petitioner/defendant also filed co



















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