33. Before adverting to the merits of the case, it would be
appropriate to deal with the specific objection raised by the
learned counsel representing the respondents with regard to
maintainability and jurisdiction of this Court, while examining
the concurrent findings returned by both the Courts below.
Mr. Chauhan, invited the attention of this Court to the
judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Laxmidevamma
and Others vs. Ranganath and Others, (2015)4 SCC 264,
wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held:
In this regard, it would be apt to reproduce the
relevant contents of judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court
in Laxmidevamma and Others vs. Ranganath and Others,
(2015)4 SCC 264, herein below:-
In this regard, it would be apt to reproduce the
relevant contents of judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court
in Laxmidevamma and Others vs. Ranganath and Others,
of
(2015)4 SCC 264, herein below:-
In this regard, it would be apt to reproduce the
relevant contents of judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex
Court in Laxmidevamma and Others vs. Ranganath and
Others, (2015)4 SCC 264, to case supra, wherein the Court
has held as under:
In this regard, it
rt
would be apt to reproduce the relevant contents of judgment
rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in Laxmidevamma and Others
vs. Ranganath and Others, (2015)4 SCC 264, herein below:-
In this regard, it would be apt to
reproduce the relevant contents of judgment rendered by
Hon'ble Apex Court in Laxmidevamma and Others vs.
Ranganath and Others, (2015)4 SCC 264, herein below:-