SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
SMT.SHARDA RANI CHHABADA Since Dead Thr. Lrs. a Munshi Ram Chhabda(DECEASED) – Appellant
Versus
RAJJAN PRASAD (DEAD) THROUGH LRS(DECEASED) – Respondent
FA 398/1996



Advocates:
['PREM FRINCIS', 'SANJAY DWIVEDI', 'ROHIT SHUKLA', 'R DUBEY', 'GREESHM JAIN', 'SM MENDHEKAR', '', 'ASHISH SHRIVASTAVA', 'ANANT BAJPAI', 'AMRITO DAS', 'AFROJ KHAN', 'ANAND VERMA', 'RAKESH DUBEY', 'AMIT VERMA', 'ANURAG VERMA', 'ANIMESH VERMA', 'VIMLESH BAJPAI', '', 'MADHU NISHA SINGH', 'G V KRISHNA RAO', 'JAMEEL AKHTAR LOHANI', 'SACHIN SINGH RAJPUT', 'NIRUPAMA BAJPAI', 'B P GUPTA', 'Richa Jain']

1

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

First Appeal No. 398 of 1996

Judgment reserved on : 13.11.2018

Judgment delivered on : 22.01.2019

1. Smt. Sharda Rani Chhabada Since Dead Through LRs.

1(a)

Munshi Ram Chhabda, H/o. Late Sharda Rani Chhabda, Aged

About 77 Years, R/o. Jagat Agency, Telipara, Bilaspur,

Chhattisgarh.

1(b)

Mangal Sen Chhabda, S/o. Late Sharda Rani Chhabda, Aged

About 54 Years, R/o. Jagat Agency, Telipara, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

1(c)

Dr. Anil Kumar Chhabda, S/o. Late Sharda Rani Chhabda, Aged

About 48 Years, R/o. Jagat Agency, Telipara, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

1(d)

Sushil Kumar Chhabda, S/o. Late Sharda Rani Chhabda, Aged

About 46 Years, R/o. Jagat Agency, Telipara, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

1(e)

Yashpal Chhabda, S/o. Late Sharda Rani Chhabda, Aged About 44

Years, R/o. Jagat Agency, Telipara, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

1(f)

Harish Kumar Chhabda, S/o. Late Sharda Rani Chhabda, Aged

About 42 Years, R/o. Jagat Agency, Telipara, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

1(g)

Smt. Usha Saluja, D/o. Late Sharda Rani Chhabda, Aged About 50

Years, W/o. Prem Saluja, C/o. Shri Anand Medical Store, Opposite

Bhandhari Mill Gate, Snehlata Ganj, Indore M.P.

2. Anoop Kumar Chhabda, S/o. Shri Munshiram Chhabda, Aged About 30

Years, R/o. Telipara, Bilaspur, Tahsil & District Bilaspur (M.P.) Now

Chhattisgarh

---- Appellants

Versus

1. Rajjan Prasad (Dead) Through LRs:

1(a)

Smt. Santibai Shukla, Wd/o. Late Rajjan Prasad, Aged About 60

Years.

1(b)

Vikash Shukla, S/o. Late Rajjan Prasad, Aged About 48 Years.

1(c)

Sanjay Shukla, S/o. Late Rajjan Prasad, Aged About 60 Years.

1(d)

Ajay Shukla, S/o. Late Rajjan Prasad, Aged About 60 Years.

All are R/o. Near Ganesh Trading Company, Telipara, District Bilaspur,

Chhattisgarh

2. Devi Prasad Tiwari (Died) Through LRs :

2(ii)A. Ravi Bhushan, S/o. Late Shri Jyoti Bhushan, Aged About 23 Years.

2(ii)B. Sashi Bhushan, S/o. Late Shri Jyoti Bhushan, Aged About 26 Years

2(ii)C. Smt. Pushpa, W/o. Late Shri Jyoti Bhushan, Aged About 38 Years.

2

All are R/o. Budhar Road Rama Bai Hospital Road, Tahsil

Suhagpur, District Shahdol (M.P.)

---- Respondents

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Appellants

:

Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, Advocate

For Respondent No.1

:

Mr. B.P.Gupta, Advocate

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

C.A.V. Judgment

22.01.2019

1.

The instant appeal is against the judgment and decree dated

23.08.1996 passed in Civil Suit No.10/1991 by the District Judge,

Bilaspur, whereby the judgment & decree for specific performance

has been passed in favour of the plaintiff/ respondent No.1. The

present appeal is by the purchasers of the suit property.

2.

The facts of the case in brief is that, a suit was filed by Rajjan

Prasad, S/o. Shambhu Dayal (since deceased) that on 04.03.1991

an agreement was executed in between Rajjan Prasad (since

deceased) and Devi Prasad Tiwari (since deceased) whereby Devi

Prasad Tiwari agreed to sell half part of the superstructure

comprised Plot No.87 recorded at Sheet No.26 admeasuring half

of 2485 sq.ft. for a sale consideration of Rs.2 Lakhs as Rajjan

Prasad was in occupation of the suit house as tenant. Out of the

total sale consideration, Rs.20,000/- was paid as an advance as

earnest money and it was agreed that till 15.04.1991 sale deed

would be executed in favour of the plaintiff. It is further pleaded

that before the date of sale a notice was received by plaintiff on

13.03.1991 and allegations were clamped that the son of the then

plaintiff Rajjan Prasad has obtained signature on the papers by

fraud and further it was pleaded that thereafter the defendant

3

No.1, the seller, contacted for execution of the sale deed and it

was stated that the plaintiff was ready and willing to execute the

sale deed by payment of remaining amount of Rs.1,80,000/-.

S

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top