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

2022 Supreme(Tri) 425

ARINDAM LODH
Amiyanshu Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Matilal Dey – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Sankar Bhattacharjee, Advocate, for the Appellant; Sankar Lodh, Advocate, for the Respondents

JUDGMENT

Arindam Lodh, J. -This second appeal arises out of the judgment and decree dated 01-02-2019 and 02.02.2019 respectively, passed by learned District Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar, in connection with Title Appeal No. 13 of 2017 whereby and whereunder the appellate court had dismissed the judgment and decree dated 28.01.2017 and 31.01.2017, passed in connection with TS (eviction) No. 03 of 2016, passed by learned Civil Judge, Sr. Division, Dharmanagar, North Tripura.

2. Brief facts:

2.1. The suit is concerned about a land measuring 0.804 acres mentioned in the schedule of the plaint. The claim of the plaintiff-appellants [here-in-after referred to as 'plaintiffs']s is that their father, late Arun Chandra Mohanta (Sharma) was the original owner of the suit land. The record of right was also created in his favour. After his death the record of right i.e. Khatian was created in the name of his legal heirs i.e. plaintiffs herein. It is the case of the plaintiffs that the defendant was residing nearby the suit land who was familiar to the plaintiffs. Since the plaintiffs were not residing over the suit land, they requested the defendant to look after the entire property on their

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