Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.23 seconds)Section 4 in The Partition Act, 1893 [Entire Act]
Section 59 in The Indian Easements Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Section 39 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
The Indian Easements Act, 1882
B. Valsala vs Sundaram Nadar Bhaskaran on 1 March, 1993
In the
decision in Valsala (supra) in paragraph 12 the learned Single Judge
held that :
Dorab Cawasji Warden vs Coomi Sorab Warden & Ors on 13 February, 1990
17. The learned counsel for the defendants relying upon the decision
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dorab Cawasji Warden v. Coomi
Sorab Warden and Others, AIR 1990 SC 867, would argue that
the defendants are entitled to protection under the second paragraph
of Section 44 of the Transfer of Property Act. In paragraph 25 of the
above decision, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that :
Gautam Paul vs Debi Rani Paul And Ors on 17 October, 2000
Since the 1st defendant is not a sharer
of the dwelling-house involved in this case, and the suit is not for
pre-emption, the decision in Gautam Paul (supra) does not apply
to the facts of this case.
Ghantesher Ghosh vs Madan Mohan Ghosh & Ors on 18 September, 1996
In the decision in Gautam Paul (supra), relying upon the above
principles laid down in Ghantesher Ghosh (supra), the Hon'ble
Apex court held that, prayer for partition is necessary for claiming
the right of pre-emption under Section 4 of the Partition Act. The
right of pre-emption recognized under Section 4 of the Partition Act
is available only to a sharer of a dwelling-house. The present suit is
not one claiming pre-emption.
George P.John vs Alex P.John on 5 March, 2020
28.In the decision in George v. John, 1984 KHC 117 relied upon by
the learned counsel for the plaintiffs, another Division Bench of this
Court held in paragraph 9 thus :