Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: partition act 1893 section 5 representation of parties under disability Court: andhra pradesh Page 1 of about 162 results (0.119 seconds)

Nov 29 1988 (HC)

Baratam Satyanarayana Vs. Baratam Kantharao and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1989AP320

..... the court in respect of items 1, 12, 13 of the plaint b.3. as the court allowed a sale between the co-sharers, the case falls under section 3 of the partition act and not under section 2. as each of the co-sharer agreed to purchase a specific item, and all of them so agreed, no objection was taken nor can be raised about ..... civil procedure and of rules 193 to 205 of the civil rules of practice. the point is whether upon a sale among co-sharers of joint property under section 3 of the partition act (hereinafter called the act), failure to deposit the bid amount would automatically require the property to be resold by invoking order 21, rule 84, c.p.c. or whether the court ..... either directing the parties to deposit 25% of the bid amount or granting time to deposit the balance of the bid amount. it is against this order that the 2nd defendant has preferred this revision petition.5. the plea of the respondents counsel sri m.s.k. sastry that there was no order for sale passed under section 3 of the partition act and that the ..... be paid by the purchaser into court before the court closes on the 15th day from the sale of the property.7. but the partition act, 1893 provides in section 2 for sale of joint property by public auction and in section 3 for auction in favour of the co-sharer or co-sharers so applying and as i shall presently show, these two types .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 11 2002 (HC)

Potluri Saraswathi Vs. Vallabhaneni Veerabhadra Rao

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2002(3)ALD690

..... . it is also to be noted in this regard that the partition was affected in 1955 and the parties under the deed kept silent, even till today, without seeking proper declaration. that is yet another militatingfactor against the defendant and supports the view that the deed was genuine and it was acted upon.17. under these circumstances, it has to be clearly held that the ..... of such dispossession or contract except document itself or the secondary evidence subject to certain conditions. under section 92 of evidence act, when a document has been properly executed as required under section 91, no evidence of any oral agreement or statements shall be admitted as between the parties for the purpose of contradicting or varying or subtracting from the terms subject to certain provisions as ..... . it cannot be disputed that exs. al and a2 were duly executed in accordance with law. in this regard, it is also necessary to refer to sections 91 and 92 of the evidence act.24. under section 91 when a term of contract or the grant or any dispossession of the property was reduced to the form ofa document of which is required to ..... , the general power of attorney was cancelled on 5-2-1981. it is the case of the plaintiff that in june, 1983, the defendant requested her to make her own arrangements to cultivate the land, but he created some obstructions at the time of harvesting the crop. therefore, the plaintiff initiated proceedings under section 144. the learned magistrate passed orders on 3-12 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 10 2003 (HC)

Rapolu Yadagiri Vs. Rapolu Lakshmamma and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR2003AP300; 2003(2)ALD445; 2003(5)ALT380

..... . it was further held:as soon as a shareholder applies for leave to buy at a valuation the share of the party asking for a sale under section 3 of the partition act he obtains an advantage in that the court is bound thereafter to order a valuation and after getting the same done to ..... the defendant's claim which, according to crump, j., cannot be done even in a suit where the provisions of the partition act have not been invoked, 17. in b. pattabhiramayya v. b. gopalakrishnayya (supra) a division bench of this court considered the question whether the plaintiff has unlimited right to withdraw the ..... stage, oral application was made by the plaintiff for withdrawal of the suit with liberty to institute fresh suit. the defendant invoked provisions of section 3 of the partition act, 1893 and opposed the withdrawal of the suit. the trial judge, having taken a view that so long as preliminary decree has not been passed ..... brothers have nothing to do with the properties, that his father was only carpenter with meager income and he was suffering from tuberculosis since 1961 which disabled him to earn any money, that by the date of purchase of item no. 1 on 18.2.1958 he was aged 18 years and ..... cannot be admitted as evidence, but it can be relied on for collateral purpose of proving transaction. a reference may be made to kakkarla vijaya v. kakkarla venkataiah (supra) wherein this court considering full bench decision of this court and a division bench judgment of madras high court laid down:in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 03 1961 (HC)

Additional Income-tax Officer, Cuddapah Vs. A. Thimmayya and Another.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : [1962]46ITR999(AP)

..... controversy rages round the question as to the consequences that flow from an order under section 25a of the act recognising a partition as having been effected from an earlier date.in order to appreciate the contentions urged by the respective parties, it is necessary to narrate the material facts briefly. the first respondent in the two appeals and one venkatanarasu along with their father ..... mines superintendent on a monthly salary of rs. 500.the additional income-tax officer, cuddapah, the appellant before us in both the appeals, issued notices dated 25th june, 1958, under section 46(5) to the managing director of the krishnappa asbestos and barytes (private) ltd. stating that a sum of rs. 65,750 was due from ranganatham and thimmaiah on account of income ..... to be the unit for purposes of assessments. though an order is passed under section 25a recognising partition, such an order does not affect the assessments as such. apart from the language of the section itself, this is made clear in the following passage of the supreme court in lakhmichand baijnath v. commissioner of income-tax :'what that tax is would depend on the assessment .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 30 1972 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kapoorchand Shrimal

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : [1974]95ITR20(AP)

..... first question that falls for our decision in this reference is whether an assessment made without first disposing of the assessee's claim for complete partition under section 25a of the act is valid in law. the department contends that such an assessment is valid, but the assessee contends that such an assessment is invalid. ..... 10, 1960, and the hindu undivided family had become disrupted and extinct and requested him to pass an order recording complete partition under section 25a of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (hereinafter called 'the act'). in his letter dated march 17, 1962, the income-tax officer acknowledged receipt of the assessee's letter dated march ..... by his order dated november 8, 1967, accepted the assessee's claim of partition and directed the income-tax officer to record an order under section 25a of the act recognising the partition with effect from july 10, 1960.16. in commissioner of income-tax v. tatavarthy narayanamurthy, : [1972]83itr58(ap) a full bench of this court ..... rs. 1,50,000 against the assessee based on business dealings between him and the assessee. the suit was, ultimately, mutually settled by the parties. under the settlement, each party withdrew its claim against the other. the assessee, therefore, claimed that the debt of rs. 42,009 due from lalgirji became bad and irrecoverable ..... a trading loss deductible in the assessment for the year 1958-59. in the circumstances of this case, we direct that each party shall bear its costs. advocate's fee rs. 250. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 23 2002 (HC)

Kalipatnapu Atchutamma Vs. Kommana Sambamurthy (Died) Per Lrs. and ors ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2003(2)ALD805; 2003(3)ALT82

..... of the partition act. this contention appears to be preposterous. section 4 of the partition act can be invoked only when the property was sought to be divided and on account of the nature of the property, it is not reasonable to divide the same. section reads as under:'4. partition suit by transferee of share in dwelling house :--( ..... cannot or ought not to be specifically performed, the court may direct specific performance of the former part.explanation :--for the purposes of this section, a party to a contract shall be deemed to be unable to perform the whole of his part of it if a portion of its subject-matter ..... specified part of the property to be partitioned and possession given. the decree could only be to the extent of transferring the share of the appellants in such property to other such contracting party. in the present case, it is not in dispute that the appellants have 5/6th share in the property. so, ..... the plaintiffs suit for specific performance to the extent of this 5/6th share was rightly decreed by the high court, which requires ..... .a.k.a. shahul humid and others, 2000 (6) alt 5 (sc). in para-15, the apex court held thus:'thus we have no hesitation to hold, even where any property is held jointly, and once any party to the contract has agreed to sell such joint property agreement, then, even if .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 12 2013 (HC)

Dr.M. Srinivas Rao, S/O. Late M. Pochai Vs. Madhura Centre/TiffIn Rep. ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

..... not seem just to deprive him.' as soon as a shareholder applies for leave to buy at a valuation the share of the party asking for a sale under section 3 of the partition act he obtains an advantage in that the court is bound thereafter to order a valuation and after getting the same done to offer ..... cannot be withdrawn by a party after it acquires a privilege. in r. ramamurthi iyer v. raja v. rajeswara rao this court held: (scc pp. 729-30, para 12) ".12. coming back to the question of withdrawal of a suit in which the provisions of sections 2 and 3 of the partition act have been invoked we find ..... and defeat the defendant's claim which, according to crump, j., cannot be done even in a suit where the provisions of the partition act have not been invoked.".34. yet again in r. rathinavel chettiar v. v. sivaraman this court, stated the law, thus: (scc pp. 96-97, para 22) ".22. in view of the above ..... abandon the suit or part of the suit claim either against a defendant or some of the defendants. in the case of a. appalaswamy (5 supra), there was a representation orally by the counsel for the plaintiff that the plaintiff desires to give up his case as against the 2nd defendant and the court held ..... that that such representation would suffice.26. therefore, in my opinion, the trial court is not correct in stating that unless an interlocutory application is filed by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 2001 (HC)

E.V. Jagannadha Rao and ors. Vs. L.S. Eswara Rao and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2002(1)ALD845; 2002(1)ALT532

..... are entitled to retain 1/4th undivided portion of the property. the appellate court directed both the parties to approach before the rent controller with a petition under section 15 of the act for a final decree and for appointment of the advocate-commissioner for partition of the property by metes and bounds. before the said court, the decision in bibijan : 1997 ..... the appellate tenants are entitled to retain 1/4th undivided portion of the property. the parties are directed to approach the learned rent controller with a petition under section 15 of the act seeking a final decree and for appointment of an advocate-commissioner for partition of the property by metes and bounds and thereafter the learned rent controller shall pass a ..... therein as they are entitled to retain 1/4th undivided portion of the property and the parties were directed to approach the learned rent controller with a petition under section 15 of the act seeking a final decree for appointment of an advocate-commissioner for partition of property by metes and bounds and thereafter the learned rent controller shall pass final decree ..... open to the parties to seek appropriate relief by way of partition and separate possession of their respective shares in the premises in question. 21. in puwada venkateswara v. c.v. ramana, : [1976]3scr551 , the supreme court while considering the question of the issue of prior notice under section 106 of the transfer of property act, held: the andhra pradesh building control act is a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 2005 (HC)

Nallam Seeta Mahalakshmi and ors. Vs. Talari Vijayalakshmi

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2005(4)ALD130; 2005(6)ALT65

..... . for the said proposition, he also placed reliance on the judgments in tara kishore v. beharu, air 1958 assam 67; santan narain v. saran narain, air 1959 pat. 331 and manohar lal v. onkar das, air 1959 punjab 252. further, learned counsel for the respondent-plaintiff contended that section 4 of the partition act can be applied only when the respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for ..... against respondents 4 to 7 for partition, the court below committed an error in granting the decree for specific performance and for possession even the shares of the parties have not yet been identified and in such circumstances, the court below ought not to have exercised the discretion for granting a decree under section 20 of the specific relief act. the plaintiff was not ready ..... loss sustained by him. if such ingredients are satisfied, the discretionary relief of specific performance is ordinarily granted unless there is delay or laches or any other disability on the part of the other party.'on facts, the supreme court found that the first defendant for the first time at the appellate stage stated that he had no title in respect of ..... no privity of contract between the plaintiff and defendants 4 to 7?3. whether the court fee paid is not correct?4. whether the suit is bad for misjoinder of parties?5. whether the suit is bad for the misjoinder of cause of action?6. whether the plaintiff is entitled for the vacant possession of the suit property?7. whether d-4 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 08 2007 (HC)

Vinnapala Veera Venkata Satyanarayana Rao and ors. Vs. Addanki Narayan ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR2007AP213

..... all facts and circumstances taking into consideration the provisions of the partition act, 1893, and also the provisions of the hindu succession act, 1956, as well, this court is inclined to remand the matter enabling the parties to move appropriate applications under the provisions of the partition act, 1893 and it is also made clear that the parties are at liberty to have adjustment by making appropriate payments of ..... importance only.36. further strong reliance was placed on the decision in harmat bibi v. prodosh kumar bajpayee 1988 (supp) scc 507 wherein the apex court while explaining the object of section 4 of the partition act, 1893 held as hereunder:on a plain reading of the provision of section 4 it is clear and evident that when an application is made by co-sharer ..... and ors. : air1996sc1826 the apex court held that section 23 of the act applies and prohibits partition of dwelling house of the deceased hindu male or female intestate, who left surviving sole male heir and female heir/heirs ..... s right to property act to seek partition of a dwelling house is inconsistent with the provisions of section 23 of the act and so stands nullified. with great respect i am unable to record my accord with the view expressed by the learned judges of the calcutta high court in the ruling referred to above.32. in narashimaha murthy v. smt. susheelabai .....

Tag this Judgment!


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