J.B.PARDIWALA
Rameshbhai Ramjibhai Sorathiya – Appellant
Versus
Dilipbhai Kalyanji Patel – Respondent
JUDGMENT (CAV)
J.B. Pardiwala, J.—This First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [for short ‘The C.P.C.’] is at the instance of the original defendants nos.5 and 6 and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 26/02/2015 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bardoli in the Special Civil Suit No.1 of 2011.
2. The facts giving rise to this First Appeal may be summarized as under:
2.1 The respondent no.1 – original plaintiff instituted the Special Civil Suit No.1 of 2011 in the Court of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bardoli and prayed for the following reliefs:
1. As the registered sale deed No.2560 executed on 15/11/2010 by the respondents nos.1 to 4 in favour of respondents nos.5 – 6 is without my consent though I am a member of the joint family and as the sale deed does not bear my signature, it is void ab initio. Therefore, declare that as I – the plaintiff possess and occupy the said property and as the possession of this property has not been handed over to respondents nos.5 – 6, this sale deed is null and void.
2. Pass decree declaring the sale-deed dated 15/11/2010 void as it is unlawful and without consideration and not enforce
M. V. S. Manikayala Rao Vs. M. Narasimhaswami& Ors. [AIR 1966 SC 470]. (Para 13) – Relied.
Ramdas Vs. SitabaiAnd Others reported in (2009) 7 SCC 444. (Para 15) – Relied.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.