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

2003 Supreme(MP) 453

S.K.PANDE
Dola – Appellant
Versus
Muzammil Hussain – Respondent


Advocates:
A.K. Chaktravarti for petitioners; A. Usmani for respondents.

JUDGMENT


Though, the case is fixed for admission, at the request of the parties, it is finally heard. C.S. No. 61-S176 as against defendant Nos. 8,9 Amaan and Gyarsa was decreed vide judgment-decree dated 10.10.1977, Court of Civil Judge -- Class-I, Raisen. The defendant Nos. 8, 9 Amaan and Gyarsa did not prefer appeal against that judgment-decree, however, the suit in respect of remaining defendants since was dismissed the plaintiff-respondent preferred an appeal No. 10-A/88 in the Court of District Judge, Bhopal. This was decided on 29.8.1991. Thereafter, on 27.9.1994 execution petition was filed against the petitioners who are legal heirs of deceased Amaan, was resisted on the grounds:

(i) That there being no decree of possession in C.S. No. 61-N76 the petitioner cannot be directed to deliver possession of the suit land.

(ii) The execution petition is barred by time as it has been filed after the prescribed period of limitation.

It was held by the impugned order dated 23.3.1991 passed by Civil Judge Class-II, Raisan, that the decree for possession was passed against the defendants Nos. 8,9 in the suit vide judgment dated 10.10.1977. The Civil Judge held that the






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