Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Satyen Vaidya, J
Roop Kumari @ Kaushalya and others – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to interim injunction order based on historical ownership claims. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. claim of illegal vesting and continuous possession. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. lower courts relied solely on fallible revenue records. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. importance of presenting evidence to challenge presumption of truth in records. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. final ruling granting interim relief to plaintiffs. (Para 22 , 23) |
Satyen Vaidya, Judge
By way of instant petition, the petitioners have assailed order dated 08.09.2022, passed by learned District Judge, Solan in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.4-S/14 of 2022, whereby order dated 18.02.2022 passed by learned Senior Civil Judge, Kasauli, District Solan in CMA No.187/6 of 2020 in Civil Suit No.160/1 of 2020 has been affirmed and the application of the petitioners under order 39 rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been dismissed.
2. The petitioners are plaintiffs in Civil Suit No.160/1 of 2020 pending on the files of learned Senior Civil Judge, Kasauli, District Solan. Parties hereinafter shall be referred to by same status as they hold before the learned trial Court.
3. The plaintiffs have filed civil suit number 160
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
