Back
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
V Srishananda, J
Begum Reshma Banu – Appellant
Versus
Mohammed Dastageer – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of proceedings and factual history of the property dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 2. analysis of appellate arguments and the findings regarding the validity of title documents. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 3. requirement of valid title to claim possession under mohammedan law and dismissal of the appeal. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.12.2016 PASSED IN RA NO.96/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MYSURU, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 17.03.2015 PASSED IN O.S.NO.1603/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL I CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, MYSURU.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Heard Sri S.Nagaraja, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms.T.Ranjini, Advocate for Sri M.Ravinson, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. Parties are referred to as plaintiff and defendant as per their original ranking before the Trial Court, for the sake of convenience.
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
