Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.50 seconds)Section 151 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 18 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 23 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Ram Kishan And Ors. vs Sheo Ram And Ors. on 12 December, 2007
The grievance of the appellants is that the Mortgage was
45 years before filing of the suit, therefore, they have
become owners of the suit property. The Full Bench of
Punjab and Haryana High Court, in "Ram Kishan & Ors,
Vs. Sheo Ram & Ors." has held that there is no limitation
period in case of usufructuary mortgage. "Once a
mortgage always a mortgage" the principle applied.
Radhey Shyam & Anr vs Chhabi Nath & Ors on 26 February, 2015
4. A perusal of the impugned order and the material on
record will indicate that the trial court has come to the correct
conclusion that in the facts and circumstances obtaining in the
case, it was impermissible in law invoking Order 12 Rule 6 CPC to
decree the suit passed in favour of the petitioners - plaintiffs
against the respondents based on the alleged admission made in
other proceedings. I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the
impugned order passed by the trial court warranting interference by
this Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India as held by the Apex Court in the case of
Radhey Shyam Vs. Chhabi Nath - (2015) 5 SCC 423.
Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
1