Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.40 seconds)
Documents citing Vishwanath Gupta And Ors. vs Virendra Nath Agrawal And Ors. on 20 March, 2007

Smt. Aarati Mishra vs Sujata Sharma (Died) Through Her Legal ... on 23 March, 2022

In support of his submission, he placed reliance upon the judgments in Vishwanath Gupta & others Vs. Virendra Nath Agrawal & others9, Haren Sarma Vs. On the death of respondent No. 1 His Legal Heirs Renu Borthakur Wife & others10, Ganesh Chandra Pradhan Vs. Rukmani Mohanty & others11, Madan Lal & others Vs. Braham Dass & others12. He would submit that the cross appeal filed by him may kindly be allowed and the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court may kindly be dismissed.
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 41 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Paan Singh Tomar vs Bhagirath Sharma (Deleted) Through Lrs ... on 8 January, 2026

12. From plain reading of the aforesaid paragraphs, it is clear that any alienation of interest of a co-heir in violation of Section 22(1) is not void but is voidable at the instance of other non-alienating co-heirs. Although, a feeble attempt was made by counsel for applicant by submitting that preferential right has to be exercised by the co-heir prior to execution of the sale-deed, but the said contention cannot be accepted. Any transaction would become voidable only when the transaction has come into existence. Furthermore, it is specifically held in paragraph 17 of the judgment passed in the case of Vishwanath Gupta (supra) that alienation of his interest by a co-heir in violation of Section 22(1) is not void, but it is voidable. Thus, whether the co-heir has already alienated the property or is Signature Not Verified Signed by: PRINCEE BARAIYA Signing time: 13-01-2026 17:35:01 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:1086 7 CR-146-2010 proposing to alienate the property will not make any difference, and in either circumstances, the sale-deed or proposed act of the co-heir can be challenged under Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - G S Ahluwalia - Full Document

Seeta vs Ramniwas on 28 April, 2023

8. The perusal of records reveals that the learned trial Court, upon due appreciation of evidence on record, recorded the findings that plaintiff/ respondent has the preferential right to purchase the land in dispute from appellant No.2/defendant No.1 as per Section 22 of Hindu Succession Act. The learned trial court after appreciation of evidence held that the plaintiffs have successfully proved that they are the owner of the disputed property as described above in view of Section 22 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Counsel for the appellants/defendants argued that since the disputed share of property has already been sold to appellant No. 1-Seeta by appellant No.2-Dwarika and therefore, the relief claimed by the respondents/plaintiffs could not be granted. He relied upon the judgment in the case of Vishwanath Gupta and Ors. Vs. Virendra Nath Agarwal and Ors. reported in 2007 (4) MPLJ 281.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - S Yadav - Full Document
1