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

A.K.RATH
Gangadhar Sahu – Appellant
Versus
Haribandhu Sahu – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellants:Mr. Dayananda Mohapatra and Mr. Maharshi Mohapatra, Advocates
For the Respondents: None

JUDGMENT

Dr. A.K. Rath, J.—Plaintiffs are the appellants against a confirming judgment in a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction.

2. The case of the plaintiffs was that plaintiff no.1, defendant nos.1, 3 and Dinabandhu Sahu, the adoptive father of plaintiff no.2, are brothers. There was partition of the properties by metes and bounds except the suit land. The suit land was in their possession. On 4.6.79, the defendant no.1 and his minor sons without the consent of the plaintiffs and defendant no.3 sold the entire suit land with tank to the defendant no.2 by means of a registered sale deed. After purchase, the defendant no.2 tried to remove the bunds of the tank. The sale is illegal. With this factual scenario, they instituted the suit seeking the reliefs mentioned supra.

3. The defendant nos.1 and 2 entered contest and filed a joint written statement. The case of the defendant nos.1 and 2 was that there was partition of the entire joint family properties amongst the brothers of plaintiff no.1, defendant nos.1, 3 and Dinabandhu Sahu. The suit land with tank fell to the share of defendant no.1. The defendant no.1 was in possession of the same. The defendant no.1 sol
















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