Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.16 seconds)

Jaswant Singh vs Ranjit Singh on 29 July, 2013

5. It was further stated that while deciding the said application, the Ex. No. 30/13 Jaswant Kaur v Ranjit Singh 3/8 Ld. Predecessor of this court specifically observed that neither the objector was able to establish his title in respect of suit shop through any cogent documentary evidence nor established his physical possession over the same. The objector did not prefer any appeal/ revision against the said Order and the same has attained finality and is binding upon the objector. It was further denied that the objector was the owner or was in possession of the suit property. It was also denied that the objector had permitted the JD to reside in the suit property or its half portion thereof so as to run his business and to maintain his family. Other averments made in the objection application of objector were specifically denied by the DH and prayer was made for the dismissal of objections.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 2 - L N Mittal - Full Document

Anathula Sudhakar vs P. Buchi Reddy (Dead) By Lrs & Ors on 25 March, 2008

11. Lastly the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case titled as 'Anathula Sudhakar v P. Buchi Reddy ( Dead ) by LRs & Ors. AIR 2008 SC 2033, in fact supports the case of DH instead of objector. In the said judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has categorically held that where complicated questions of fact and law relating to title are involved, the appropriate remedy is a comprehensive suit for declaration of title. In the main suit of the present case, no such issue was involved.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 2311 - R V Raveendran - Full Document
1