Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.29 seconds)Kakumanu Peda Subbayya Andanother vs Kakumanu Akkamma And Another on 4 September, 1958
7. The observations made in para 9 of the said judgment of the Supreme Court are reproduced as under:
Section 340 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
S. Jasdeep Singh vs S. Kehar Singh And Ors. on 28 April, 2004
6. Learned counsel for defendant No. 1 has brought to the notice of this Court a judgment of the learned single Judge of this Court in S. Jasdeep Singh v. S. Kehar Singh and Ors. .
Aditya Murgai vs Ashok Murgai on 14 December, 2001
The learned single Judge has relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench in FAO (OS)No.553/2001 titled Master Aditya Murgai v. Ashok Murgai decided on 1.11.2002 and referred to para 9 of the Master Aditya Murgai case (Supra). The Division Bench observed that it is a settled law that on partition of a coparcenary property, the property falling into the share of each coparcener assumes a dual character. It becomes a separate individual property qua other coparceners with whom partition has taken place and for his lineal descendants it retains the character of ancestral property and therefore a son, grandson born before or after partition take a share in the property by birth.
1