Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 1 of 1 (0.22 seconds)

Ram Phal (D) Thr. Lrs. vs Khazani Devi (D) Thr Lrs on 11 July, 2016

[8]. Against the order passed by the High Court in the aforesaid RSA and review application, SLP (C) Nos.16190/ 16191 of 2016 tiled 'Ram Phal (D) through LRs & others vs. Khazani Devi (D) through LRs & others' was filed in the Hon'ble Apex Court which was dismissed on 11.07.2016. [9]. Thereafter execution was filed by the decree-holders in which objections were filed by the judgment-debtors/petitioners. The objections were dismissed by the executing Court/Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Jhajjar vide order dated 18.03.2017 against which review application was filed and the same was also dismissed vide order dated 16.08.2018 passed by the Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) Jhajjar. That is how the present revision 4 of 12 ::: Downloaded on - 14-10-2018 01:34:25 ::: CR No.6544 of 2018 5 petition came to be filed against both the aforesaid orders. [10]. The narration of aforesaid facts would show that the petitioners have lost main litigation upto the Hon'ble Apex Court. In the execution proceedings initiated by the decree-holders, the objections were filed by relying upon voluminous documents/revenue record which has been attached herein also in the form of old revenue records to contend that in fact, the pleadings in the suit were only to the effect that Smt. Ram Kaur was owner in possession of area measuring 41 Bighas 7 Biswas in Khewat No.110 and 9 Bighas 16 Biswas in Khewat No.112. The details of land mentioned in the head note of the plaint to the extent of 702 Kanals 3 Marlas were wrongly recorded. Thereafter, the Courts below proceeded to decide the lis on unfounded facts.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1