Back
T. AMARNATH GOUD
Kalpana Sarkar – Appellant
Versus
Akhil Datta – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. This present appeal is filed against the Judgment and Decree dated, 10.04.2019, passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, West Tripura, Agartala, in T.A. 09 of 2018 arising out of the Judgment and Decree dated 22.02.2018 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Court No.1, Agartala, West Tripura in T.S.53 of 2015.
2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that respondent as plaintiff filed a title suit claiming the right title and interest on the suit land and for recovery of possession in respect of the suit land against the defendant-appellant for land measuring 6 gandas comprised in khatian No. 5951 of old CS Plot No. 7098(p), Hal CS plot No. 25610 under Mouja- Badharghat, sheet No. 5, Tehsil- Badharghat. According to the plaintiff-respondent, he is the owner of the suit land, and on the basis of title deed No. 1-7109 dated 09.10.2007 executed by the vendor-defendant, he took possession of the same. He applied for the mutation but the same was not granted in his favour. On 18.05.2008 when the respondent-plaintiff intended to fix pillars on his land, at that time he was resisted by the defendant-appellant, her sons and daughter, and other persons. According t
The second appeal requires substantial questions of law that affect party rights; concurrent factual findings from lower courts are binding unless proved perverse.
The court held that the plaintiffs proved ownership through valid Sale Deed; defendants failed to substantiate adverse possession claims due to contradictions in evidence.
The sufficiency of unchallenged documentary evidence for establishing title and ownership is critical in property disputes.
Second Appeal – Substantial question of law -condition precedent for entertaining and deciding a Second Appeal being existence of a substantial question of law, whenever a question is framed by the H....
It is trite that once declaration of right, title and interest have been granted in favour of a particular person, person who claims adversarial interest has to show a better title as to why he shoul....
The validity of a sale deed confers title to the purchaser, and claims of permissive occupation by defendants do not negate this ownership.
Plaintiff's subsisting title must be established to claim possession. Adverse possession claim requires fulfillment of specific requirements.
The validity of a sale deed and the requirement for registration as per Section 70 of the Registration Act were central to the court's decision.
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
