Back
RAJENDRA M. SAREEN
Jenabai Aamad Lohar – Appellant
Versus
Singhal Mahendra Mansang – Respondent
ORDER (ORAL)
Present Second Appeal has been preferred by the appellants – original defendants against the concurrent findings of the learned courts below arising out of the suit for getting vacant possession of the suit property from the defendants and mesne profit. The present Second Appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgement and decree passed by the learned 5th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bhuj in Regular Civil Appeal No.10 of 2018 dated 11/7/2022, by which the learned first appellate court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgement and decree passed by the learned 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bhuj in Regular Civil Suit No.286 of 2002 dated 28/12/2017, by which the learned trial court decreed the suit in favour of the respondent plaintiff.
2. Factual matrix of the case is as under:—
2.1. Non-agricultural land at Revenue Survey No. 829 in the Camp area of Central Bhuj in Jesthanagar bearing Plot No.27 admeasuring 246.9 sq.mtrs. in Ward No.30 Sheet No.204 is registered at entry no. 3636 in the City Survey office. A division of the said plot bearing no. 27/B paiki admeasuring 131.6 consists of three houses out of which House No.3 consists of
Second Appeal is competent only if it involves, at the stage of admission, substantial question of law.
The importance of presenting timely and substantiated evidence to support claims, and the consequences of negligence and lack of diligence in pursuing legal remedies.
Sale - Validity - Defendants were not interested or they did not try to bring their case before court and lead evidence in support of their case to with respect to sale deed being sham, bogus or frau....
Concurrent findings of fact can only be interfered with if they are found to be perverse or based on no evidence. High Court's jurisdiction in Second Appeal is limited to substantial questions of law....
The High Court can only entertain a Second Appeal on a substantial question of law and has no jurisdiction to entertain it on the ground of erroneous findings of fact.
The possession is a pure question of fact, and the findings of fact recorded by the lower courts cannot be interfered with unless they are based on no evidence or are perverse.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of proving readiness and willingness to perform a contract for specific performance, as well as the limited scope of interference in concurrent findings of fact....
The jurisdiction of the Civil Court is limited to substantial questions of law, and adverse possession must be proven with evidence to claim ownership of government land.
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
