advocatemmmohan
just another law knowledge bank
D.Yellappa
Both suits are remanded due to contradictory recordings for clubbing and disposal = We may have remanded the matter to the High Court for fresh disposal of the appeals filed by the appellant and respondent No. 2 but keeping in view the fact that the findings recorded in the two suits regarding Item No. 5 of Schedule `B’ properties specified in the plaint of O.S. No. 4528 of 1980 are contradictory and substantial portion of the judgment of O.S. No. 4528 of 1980 is based on surmises and conjectures, we feel that ends of justice would be met by setting aside the impugned judgment and remitting the matter to the trial Court for fresh disposal of the suits filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2. In the result, the appeals are allowed. The impugned judgment is set aside. The judgments of the trial Court in O.S. Nos. 4528 of 1980 and 2062 of 1981 are also set aside and the matter is remitted to the trial Court for fresh disposal of the suits. With a view to avoid the possibility of conflicting findings regarding Item No.5 of Schedule `B’ properties specified in the plaint of O.S. No.4528 of 1980, we direct the trial Court to club the two suits and dispose of 3 the same by one judgment. The parties shall be free to file applications for additional evidence and bring on record the orders passed by the Land Tribunal and the High Court in relation to Item Nos. 1 to 4 of Schedule `B’ appended to the plaint of O.S. No.4528 of 1980.
published in http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/helddis.aspx NON REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 6714-6715 OF 2002 Y. Nagaraj ……..Appellant Versus Smt. Jalajakshi and others …….Respondents J U D G M E N T G. S. Singhvi, J. 1. These appeals … Continue reading
PARTITION SUITS = the findings recorded in the two suits regarding Item No. 5 of Schedule `B’ properties specified in the plaint of O.S. No. 4528 of 1980 are contradictory and substantial portion of the judgment of O.S. No. 4528 of 1980 is based on surmises and conjectures, we feel that ends of justice would be met by setting aside the impugned judgment and remitting the matter to the trial Court for fresh disposal of the suits filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
NON REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 6714-6715 OF 2002 Y. Nagaraj ……..Appellant Versus Smt. Jalajakshi and others …….Respondents J U D G M E N T G. S. Singhvi, J. 1. These appeals filed against judgment dated 22.2.1999 … Continue reading
advocatemmmohan 