Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2 (0.18 seconds)Sarla Kumari vs Santosh Kumari And Ors. on 2 July, 1996
Learned Counsel for the plaintiff/appellant has vehemently
argued that the findings returned by both the courts below are wrong,
illegal and are liable to be set aside on the ground that co-sharer in
possession of land to the exclusion of other co-sharers has right to remain
in occupation till partition. He has placed reliance upon judgments
passed by this High Court in Sarla Kumari Vs. Santosh Kumari 1997
(1) Civil Court Cases 168(P&H) & Bal Kishan Vs. Ram Singh 2001(3)
Civil Court Cases 52 (P&H). Thus it was prayed that both the courts
below ought to have decreed the suit of the plaintiff and hence the
findings returned by them are liable to be set aside. It was further argued
in alternative that since there is no finding regarding possession,
therefore, the matter should be remanded back to determine the question
RSA No.3020 of 2012(O&M) #3#
as to who is in possession of the property at present.
1