Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR
Ramchandra (Deceased) Through Legal Representatives – Appellant
Versus
Babulal – Respondent
ORDER :
SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR, J.
Heard on admission.
The present second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure is filed feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 15.5.2025 passed in Regular Civil Appeal No. 25/2023 by the Vth District Judge, Dr. Ambedkar Nagar, Mhow affirming the judgment and decree dated 13.3.2023 passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 160A/2018 by IInd Civil Judge Junior Division, Dr. Amebedkar Nagar, Mhow. Thus, the present appeal is filed assailing the concurrent finding with regard to grant of decree of possession in favour of plaintiff (respondent herein) on the disputed property and also declaration to the effect that agreement to sale dated 18.1.1989 is not binding on the plaintiff.
2. Plaintiff Babulal had filed suit for declaration, permanent injunction, and recovery of possession against his brother Ramchandra inter-alia pleading that the suit properties were received by him in family partition in the year 1993-94. Accordingly, the suit properties were recorded in his name in the revenue records after mutation of shares in favour of himself, his brothers and father. He had permitted his brother Ramchandra to cultivate the disputed land
A second appeal under Section 100 CPC must demonstrate a substantial question of law; inadequate proof invalidates an agreement to sell, with both courts correctly concluding the decree of possession....
Sale - Validity - Defendants were not interested or they did not try to bring their case before court and lead evidence in support of their case to with respect to sale deed being sham, bogus or frau....
The possession is a pure question of fact, and the findings of fact recorded by the lower courts cannot be interfered with unless they are based on no evidence or are perverse.
Under section 100 CPC, after the 1976 amendment, it is essential for the High Court to formulate a substantial question of law and it is not permissible to reverse the judgment of the first appellate....
A second appeal under Section 100 CPC is restricted to substantial questions of law, not factual re-evaluations. Valid proofs for claims such as adoption must meet statutory requirements for recognit....
The presumption of truth in the revenue record regarding joint ownership prevails, establishing that separate possession does not equate to partition without legal acknowledgment under relevant land ....
(1) In appeals arising out of State of Punjab or State of Haryana, courts are not required to frame substantial questions of law as per Section 100 of CPC.(2) Second Appeal – Ordinarily, in second ap....
Agreements for new tenure land lacking collector permission are void under Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act, nullifying claims for specific performance and possession under Section 53(A) of the ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
