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

2023 Supreme(MP) 215

SUBODH ABHYANKAR
Ranubai – Appellant
Versus
Basanti Bai – Respondent


Advocates:
Akhilesh Shrama for petitioners; Shalabh Sharma for respondent No. 4; Anshul Rajpurohit for respondent No.1.

ORDER

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioners/defendants No.1 and 4 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against order dated 10.12.2022, passed by the third Civil Judge Senior Division Dhar in RCSA No.101/2017; whereby, the petitioner/defendants No.1 and 4's application filed under Order 13 rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter to be referred to as ‘CPC’) to bring certain documents in evidence, has been rejected.

2. In brief, the facts of the case are that respondent No.1 Bastanti Bai has filed the Civil Suit for declaration, perpetual injunction, partition and recovery of the amount of the award in a land acquisition proceedings. In the aforesaid civil suit, the case is at the stage of recording of evidence of the plaintiff, and during which initially an application under Order 13 rule 10 of the CPC dated 3.8.2022 was filed by the petitioners (Annexure P-6) to call for the record of Tehsil Court on the ground that in the aforesaid proceedings in the Court of Tahsildar, the plaintiff had admitted the factum of partition and on that basis the order has been passed by the Tahsildar on 10.2.2016. The certified copies of which have also been plac

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