Sodhuram v. Durga Prasad and Others - 2006 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 75

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2006 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 75

CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
A. M. Khanwilkar, J
Sodhuram v. Durga Prasad and Others

Advocates:
For the Appellant: [Senior Counsel]
For the Respondent: [Counsel]

Table of Content
1. partition details concerning joint family property. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments regarding burden of proof in partition claims. (Para 4 , 5)
3. judicial analysis on evidence and its implications. (Para 6 , 10 , 11 , 13 , 14)
4. clarification on burden of proof under evidence law. (Para 8 , 9)
5. final ruling on the appeal and judgement confirmation. (Para 15)

1. This appeal has been directed against the impugned judgement and decree dated 25-9-1996, passed in Civil suit No. 8-A/1994 by the First Additional Judge to the Court of Distt. Judge, Bilaspur (C.G.). By the aforesaid judgement and decree, the plaintiff's suit for partition and separate possession has been decreed by the trial Court.

2. The brief facts are that the plaintiffs, who are the successors of one Nohar Sai, filed a suit for partition and separate possession in relation to the suit house situated in village Champa, the then Distt. Bilaspur (C. G.). The plaint allegations are that Nohar Sai, Sodhu Ram and Dwarpal were the real brothers. The suit house was a joint family property. Nohar Sai was having 1/3 rd share in the suit house. In the year 1968, in lieu of recovery of a loan taken by Sodhu Ram from