LawCite Search |
LawCite Markup Tool |
Help |
Feedback
Law Cite |
Case Name | Citation(s) | Court | Jurisdiction | Date † | Full Text | Citation Index | |
B " in the plaint map The courts below came to a conclusion that after the death of Ramanand Tewari, his widow and daughter-in-law were the only persons who had a right to inherit the property but after them, there was no other heir in the first, second and third category as provided in the Succession Act, therefore, the plaintiff being nephew of Ramanand Tewari (son of his brother) who alone has succeeded to the property The claim of the defendant-appellant was not accepted as she claimed title on the basis that she was living in the disputed house by permission of late Ramanand Tewari and on the basis of an instrument Learned counsel has emphatically argued that the defendant had adduced documentary evidence such as certified copy of the Vidhan Sabha Voter List, her name was recorded in the Nagar Palika Register, certified copy of the decree in the original suit No 379 of 1981, notice of Nagar Mahapalika and certain receipts which were issued to late Ram Dulari Devi and Dev Kumari On the basis of the aforesaid documents, it is argued that the courts below have illegally decreed the suit on the basis of succession whereas no relief on the question of possession has been claimed and neither finding has been recorded Learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Bhagwati Prasad Vs Chandramaul |
|
Supreme Court of India | India | circa 1966 |
|