Back
T. AMARNATH GOUD
Babul Debnath – Appellant
Versus
Kamal Ghosh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. description of the factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. procedural history of the appeals and court decisions. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. substantial questions of law framed for the appeal. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. arguments presented by the parties regarding law applicability. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. court's analysis and final dismissal of the appeal. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT
T. Amarnath Goud, J. - This instant second appeal has been filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'CPC') aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 13.12.2019 and 16.12.2019 passed by the learned District Judge, Gomati District, Tripura, Udaipur in T.A. 12 of 2007, whereby, the learned First Appellate Court set aside the judgment and decree dated 29.03.2007 and 04.04.2007 respectively passed in T.S. 11 of 2006 by the learned Civil Judge(Sr. Division) South Tripura(now Gomati) District, Udaipur.
2. The facts of the case in brief leading to this present second appeal are that Smt. Jyotsnamoyee Datta under a registered deed No. 1-398 dated 20.03.1970 purchased from one Jogesh Debnath land described in the schedule 'A' of the plaint. T
Court must adhere to proper procedural standards concerning payment and justification of court fees; established rights of land ownership must be protected against claims of adverse possession withou....
Adverse possession requires clear proof of hostile, open, and continuous possession; claims based on mere occupation without valid documents are insufficient.
The court upheld the lower courts' findings, emphasizing the limited scope of re-appreciating evidence in second appeals under Section 100 CPC.
The failure of the Trial Court to adequately consider evidence and provide a reasoned judgment necessitates remand for fresh consideration, ensuring jurisdiction is correctly exercised and due proces....
The court affirmed the principle that established boundaries take precedence over conflicting land titles, and concurrent factual findings by lower courts are upheld unless proven manifestly erroneou....
The courts affirmed the principle that a legitimate title and prior possession override claims of permissive possession, in the absence of contrary evidence.
The court affirmed that adverse possession requires substantial proof that is open, continuous, and adverse to the true owner for over 12 years, emphasizing legal title must be established by clear e....
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
