VIVEK AGARWAL
Babua Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Meena Yadav – Respondent
ORDER
1. Petitioner / defendent No.1 challenging the order dated 29/10/2021 passed by learned IV Additional District Judge, Rewa in MCA No.28/2021 in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India on the ground that the Court below has committed an error in accepting the appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 of the CPC and directing the defendant No.1 by way of temporary injunction that neither they shall cause any interference in the possession of the appellants therein i.e. plaintiffs nor shall cause any interference through anybody else.
2. The only issue involved in this Miscellaneous Appeal is that Chiddi author of the will executed the will on 27/08/2014 in favour of one Ramkalesh and Babua. Ramkalesh died on 30/01/2017 during the lifetime of Chiddi.
Thereafter, Chiddi executed the registered will only in favour of Babua. This registered will is the bone of contention.
3. However, it is an admitted fact and accepted by the learned 1st Appellate Court that Ramkalesh died on 30/01/2017 prior to death of Chiddi.
4. Thus, the issue which emerges for decision is whether the 1st Appellate Court was justified in granting injunction and directing respondent Babua to hand over possess
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.