Skip to content


Shripati Kundlik Vs. Piraji Pattoji - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty;Civil
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberSecond Appeal No. 206
Judge
Reported in(1907)9BOMLR1018
AppellantShripati Kundlik
RespondentPiraji Pattoji
Excerpt:
.....against him.;further, that p could not rely on his new title as an answer to s's claim for possession, for p had by availing himself of his position as khatedar gained an advantage in derogation of the rights of s. - .....passed against him; and it appears to us that the only question is whether piraji can rely on his new title as an answer to the plaintiff's claim for possession. we think he cannot, for, the defendant has, on the facts found, by availing himself of his position as khatedar, gained an advantage in derogation of the rights of the plaintiffs.3. in the circumstances we are of opinion that no sufficient ground is made out for restoration of the land to piraji.4. we, accordingly, reverse the decree and dismiss the plaintiffs' application with costs throughout.
Judgment:

Lawrence Jenkins, C.J.

1. In our opinion the decree under appeal should be reversed.

2. It is erroneous to speak of Piraji as a person other than the judgment-debtor. He is the judgment-debtor and none the less so because he may have acquired an interest subsequent to the date of the decree passed against him; and it appears to us that the only question is whether Piraji can rely on his new title as an answer to the plaintiff's claim for possession. We think he cannot, for, the defendant has, on the facts found, by availing himself of his position as Khatedar, gained an advantage in derogation of the rights of the plaintiffs.

3. In the circumstances we are of opinion that no sufficient ground is made out for restoration of the land to Piraji.

4. We, accordingly, reverse the decree and dismiss the plaintiffs' application with costs throughout.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //