Suit for Possession—Claim based on title—Layout plans cannot be evidence of title of property

This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register below.

By phlaw| January 27th, 2019|Specific Relief Act|Comments Off

Permalink
Gallery
Specific Relief Act, 1963, S.37–Injunction–Release Deed—Plaintiffs, daughters, were 4th generation in lineage-Any release deed in respect of suit property executed by Karta, who proved to be ancestor can always be challenged during his life time.
April 2nd, 2019 | Comments Off on Specific Relief Act, 1963, S.37–Injunction–Release Deed—Plaintiffs, daughters, were 4th generation in lineage-Any release deed in respect of suit property executed by Karta, who proved to be ancestor can always be challenged during his life time.
Permalink
Gallery
Specific Relief Act, 1963, S.34–Suit for Partition-Oral partition without causing entry in the revenue record or the records of the revenue authority would not confer joint ownership.
March 29th, 2019 | Comments Off on Specific Relief Act, 1963, S.34–Suit for Partition-Oral partition without causing entry in the revenue record or the records of the revenue authority would not confer joint ownership.
Permalink
Gallery
Specific Relief Act, 1963, S.34–Suit for Possession-Plaintiff is in possession—Claim by defendant no.2 on being licensee—As per revenue records ownership lies with panchayat—In the absence of any grant by original licensee, subsequent licensee cannot be branded as a licensee
March 29th, 2019 | Comments Off on Specific Relief Act, 1963, S.34–Suit for Possession-Plaintiff is in possession—Claim by defendant no.2 on being licensee—As per revenue records ownership lies with panchayat—In the absence of any grant by original licensee, subsequent licensee cannot be branded as a licensee
Permalink
Gallery
Agreement to Sell-No evidence has been led to believe the thumb impression or circumstances as to how they appeared on the agreement to sell-No sane person, on receipt of the notice of the plaint, would sit idle, rather would make all efforts in case there is an attempt of forgery on the part of the opposite party-No such effort has been made in this case, therefore, adverse inference of the receipt of amount towards the security loan is the correct appreciation
March 28th, 2019 | Comments Off on Agreement to Sell-No evidence has been led to believe the thumb impression or circumstances as to how they appeared on the agreement to sell-No sane person, on receipt of the notice of the plaint, would sit idle, rather would make all efforts in case there is an attempt of forgery on the part of the opposite party-No such effort has been made in this case, therefore, adverse inference of the receipt of amount towards the security loan is the correct appreciation
Permalink
Gallery
Agreement to Sell-Refund of earnest money—After non execution of sale deed on target date, due to illness of purchaser, seller sold land to third party—But there was exchange of communication immediately after the expiry of target date which establishes that party had intention to purchase—Court rightly directed refund of earnest money
March 28th, 2019 | Comments Off on Agreement to Sell-Refund of earnest money—After non execution of sale deed on target date, due to illness of purchaser, seller sold land to third party—But there was exchange of communication immediately after the expiry of target date which establishes that party had intention to purchase—Court rightly directed refund of earnest money
Permalink
Gallery
Agreement to Sell—Earnest Money—Once readiness and willingness had not been proved, earnest money deemed to have been forfeited
March 15th, 2019 | Comments Off on Agreement to Sell—Earnest Money—Once readiness and willingness had not been proved, earnest money deemed to have been forfeited
Permalink
Gallery
Suit for ownership—Once the original sale deed has been produced and has come on record, the court cannot refuse to look into said document in favour of the plaintiff merely because it has been produced by the defendant
March 9th, 2019 | Comments Off on Suit for ownership—Once the original sale deed has been produced and has come on record, the court cannot refuse to look into said document in favour of the plaintiff merely because it has been produced by the defendant

Search Here

Receive law updates, daily – Subscribe to our LawLetter

Find us on Facebook

Supreme Court of India – Judgements

Indian IPR resources.

Membership open – Laws of India info group – LAWSINDIA.IN – Visit

Guests have searched for Punjab & Haryana law

Judgements – Topic wise

Suit for Possession—Claim based on title—Layout plans cannot be evidence of title of property

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!

Related Posts

Receive law updates, daily – Subscribe to our LawLetter

Find us on Facebook

Supreme Court of India – Judgements

Indian IPR resources.

Guests have searched for Punjab & Haryana law

Judgements – Topic wise