Back
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Baba Sarabojot Singh Bedi – Appellant
Versus
Sada Ram – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Rakesh Kainthla, J.—The present appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by learned Additional District Judge, Una, vide which the appeal filed by the appellant (the plaintiff before the learned Trial Court) was dismissed. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience).
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the plaintiff filed a civil suit before the learned Trial Court for seeking possession by ejectment of the defendants from the shop in disputed premises denoted by letters A B C D E F G H, shown in the site plan, being part of the land measuring 0-13-15 hectares, bearing Khasra No. 1382 and 1388, situated in Village Ishpur, Tehsil and District Una, H.P., as entered in Misal Hakiat for the year 1994-95. It was pleaded that this land was earlier owned and possessed by Smt. Jeeto. She constructed many shops on the suit land and leased out the shop in dispute to the defendant at a monthly rent of ? 100/-. She gifted the shop to the plaintiff on 30.11.1995 The defendant attorned to the plaintiff after the execution of the gift deed. The defend
(1) A party is not entitled to produce additional evidence unless it shows that evidence could not be produced before Trial Court despite exercise of due diligence.(2) Plaintiff cannot be held entitl....
Second appeals under CPC S.100 do not permit re-appreciation of evidence; concurrent findings upheld absent perversity or substantial question of law. Adverse possession claim fails without rebutting....
In a second appeal under Section 100 of the CPC, the High Court cannot re-appreciate evidence or interfere with concurrent factual findings unless a substantial question of law is demonstrated; addit....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of considering material aspects and appreciating the findings of the trial court in property dispute cases.
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....
Appellate court cannot admit additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC absent due diligence proof or necessity for judgment; must record reasons; erroneous allowance despite negligence and delay....
The appellate Court's evaluation of evidence and finding no error in the trial Court's decision led to the dismissal of the appeal.
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
