Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.17 seconds)
Srinivasulu K vs Gurumurthy on 27 April, 2026 cites

Surender Pal Singh vs Siri Chand And Ors on 28 February, 2022

19. He relied on the Judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana reported in 2024 latest case law 14878 P&H (HARENDER PAL SINGH VS. SIRI CHAND AND ANOTHER) decided on 21.08.2024, wherein it is held that since the defendant - appellant has failed to prove that the passage is not common passage and is private property, the judgment and decree passed by both the courts cannot faulted.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - S Mittal - Full Document

Smt N Kumari vs City Municipal Council on 27 July, 2012

18. The learned counsel for the plaintiff relied on the 41 O.S.No.598 / 2016 Judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P.No.15800/2010 (LB-RES) decided on 27.07.2012 (SMT. N.KUMARI VS. CITY MUNICIPAL COUNSIL CHINTAMANI AND ANOTHER), wherein in para 7 it is observed that "Conservancy lane" is not defined in the Act, but the term 'street' is defined under sub section - (26) of Section - 2 of the Act to mean - any road, footway, square, court, alley or passage accessible whether permanently or temporarily to the public, ether throughfare or not; and shall include every vacant space, notwithstanding that it may be private property and partly and or wholly obstructed by any gate, post, chain or other barrier, if houses, shops or other buildings abut thereon, if it is used by any person as a means of access to or from any public place or thoroughfare, whether such persons be occupiers of such buildings or not; but shall not include any part of such space which the occupier of any such building has a right at all hours to prevent all other persons from using as aforesaid.
Karnataka High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - R M Reddy - Full Document
1