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

ARUN BHANSALI
Shanti Lal – Appellant
Versus
Shantilal – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. Alkesh Agarwal, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Arvind Samdariya, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Arun Bhansali, J.—This appeal under Section 96 CPC is directed against judgment and decree dated 07.08.2002 passed by District Judge Pali, whereby, the suit filed by the respondent - plaintiff has been decreed for possession and mesne profit.

2. The suit was filed by the plaintiff on 11.08.1992 for possession of the suit property and mesne profit on the ground that one Hastimal, who was plaintiff’s maternal uncle, executed a will dated 08.11.1976 in his favour, the said Hastimal died on 19.12.1976 and as such all the rights which Hastimal had came to be vested in him qua the immoveable property and since then plaintiff is the owner and in possession of the immovable property.

3. It was further indicated in the plaint that Late Hastimal had a sister named Sukniya Bai, who was residing with him being a widow at a young age and as it was the Will of the testator that she can reside in the suit property till her death and as such, she remained in the house after the death of Hastimal and that Smt. Sukniya Bai died on 12.05.1992.

4. It is claimed that as plaintiff was the only son of his father, for helping him in his cloth business he used to reside with his father and would re

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