Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: partition act 1893 section 5 representation of parties under disability Year: 2003 Page 1 of about 43 results (0.445 seconds)

Jan 10 2003 (HC)

Rapolu Yadagiri Vs. Rapolu Lakshmamma and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-10-2003

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 08 2003 (HC)

Anukul Chandra Sadhukhan Vs. Ajit Kumar Sadhukhan and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Aug-08-2003

Reported in : AIR2004Cal170,2004(2)CHN160

..... purchased a portion of the same by the aforesaid deed dated 15.1.1977. since the respective shares of the parties were not in dispute, so the suit was decreed in its preliminary form on contest but the petition under section 4 of the partition act as filed by the plaintiff-appellant was dismissed on merits. such dismissal by the trial court was challenged in ..... contention of mr. banerjee has no force for the reasons as stated hereunder. the supreme court in the case of gautam paul v. debi rani paul, reported in : (2000)8scc330 has discussed the scope of an application under section 4 of the partition act, at the instance of the co-sharers in a suit filed by them in detail. the said paragraph is quoted hereunder ..... decision of the supreme court reported in air 1990 sc 876, dorab cawasji warden v. coomi sorab warden and ors. in the said case, the appellant filed a suit against the vendors that is his brother's wife and her sons under section 44 of the transfer of property act. the appellant's brother died intestate. his widow and his two minor sons sold ..... (ii) scc 446 as relied on by mr. banerjee was considered and upon such consideration, no different proposition was laid down than what taken in the case of goutam paul v. debi rani paul.8. the contention of mr. banerjee that since the defendant nos. 1 and 2 are in actual physical possession of a portion of the undivided family dwelling .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 07 2003 (HC)

Jagir Singh Vs. Amarjit Singh and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-07-2003

Reported in : AIR2004P& H51

..... and he had rightly transferred the same in favour of the respondent nos. 2 and 3.'5. mr. n. s. boparal, learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant has argued that even after partition in 1956 the decree incorporating the aforementioned partition dated 7-5.-1958, the share of the land in the hands of defendant-respondent 1 sadhu singh ..... respondent 1 was not entitled to alienate the same, nothing has been proved on record that the sale made to defendant-respondents 2 and 3 was not an act of good management or for a legal necessity. it may be true that a share obtained by a coparcener from ancestral property continues to be ancestral property ..... plaintiff-appellant would be entitled to a share. learned counsel has further argued that the suit land could have been alienated only for a legal necessity or as an act of good management.6. mr. a. k. khunger, learned counsel for the defendant-respondents has submitted that firstly both the courts have found that the suit - ..... defendant-respondent 1 was not competent to alienate the suit land in the manner he liked unless such a sale is for a legal necessity or as an act of good management. referring to paragraphs 11 and 12 of the judgment of the trial court, the learned counsel has pointed out that even defendant-respondent 1 ..... m.m. kumar, j.1. this is plaintiff s appeal filed under section 100 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 (for brevit, 'the code') challenging concurrent findings of facts recorded by both the courts below, holding that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 25 2003 (HC)

Hari Ram Vs. Lala Om Prakash

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-25-2003

Reported in : 2003IVAD(Delhi)124; 104(2003)DLT861; 2003(68)DRJ510

..... portions in occupation of the plaintiff was going to be demolished does not mean that they were carrying out additions or alterations in a partitioned property. it was again an act of accommodation with each other. 22. both the parties have admitted that whatever they have spent in their respective portions it was borne by them individually. 23. the contention of the counsel ..... barred by the provisions of order 2 rule 2, cpc. admittedly, the prior litigation alleged by the defendant was in respect of the joint business of the parties and not in respect of partition of the suit property. order 2 rule 2, cpc provides that every suit shall include the whole of the claim which the plaintiff is entitled to make in ..... and same is the situation of the premises with the defendant. more so, the portion which was in occupation of the mother have also fallen for being divided between the parties. over and above, the implication of an agreement by living in their respective portion for more than 30 years does not mean that the oral agreement has been implemented particularly ..... the following issues: 1.whetherthere has been an oral partition of the suit property pursuant tofamily settlement which was acted upon? opd2.whetherthe suit is barred by limitation in view of the averments made in para 1of the preliminary objections and paras 5 and 6 of the written statement? opd3.whetherthe suit is not barred under order 2 rule 2, cpc on account of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 13 2003 (SC)

Azeez Sait 'dead' by Lrs. and Ors. Vs. Aman Bai and Ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-13-2003

Reported in : AIR2003SC4444; 2004(5)ALLMR(SC)92; (SCSuppl)2004(1)CHN94; 2003(4)CTC376; JT2003(9)SC463; 2003(8)SCALE527; (2003)12SCC419

..... the appellants contended that the parties are governed by the provisions of cutchi memons act. we are of the view that the issue as to whether hindu law or mohammedan law should be applied to the parties under suit is not really relevant and does not alter the situation because the partition had taken place in the ..... an annexure along with the application for substitution of legal representatives of late azeez sait. civil appeal came up for hearing on 6.8.2003. a representation was made on behalf of the appellant that appellant no. 1 expired and, therefore, time was sought for filing the application for bringing heirs of the ..... and hence all the properties were sold subsequently or alienated as evidence as per ex. p-5 to p-8 irrespective of the partition deed and hence the partition is sham and nominal and that it was not acted upon.7. before the high court, defendants 1-4 have not challenged the findings of the ..... 8. during the pendency of the appeal before the high court, the mother of the appellant herein died. the first defendant also died and respondents 1-5 herein were brought on record as legal representatives of the deceased - 1st defendant. on consideration of the entire evidence, the high court had no option but ..... item no. 1 was purchased in the name of the plaintiff and suit item no. 4 was purchased in the name of mohd. abba sait.5. the trial court passed the judgment and decree as indicated in paragraph supra and decreed the suit.6. aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 10 2003 (HC)

Gajendra Mohapatra and Four ors. Vs. Padi Bewa (Died) by L.Rs. and ors ...

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Mar-10-2003

Reported in : 96(2003)CLT55

..... were taken up for consideration at the stage of trial and judgment.issues1. is the suit bad for non-joinder of parties and non-inclusion of all joint family properties ? 2. are the defendants entitled to the benefits under section 4 of the partition act ? 3. are the plaintiffs entitled to ac.o.33 decs, claimed ? 4. to what relief, if any, the plaintiffs are ..... 'entitied ? 5. whether the plea of adverse possession and ouster taken by the defendants is true 2. plaintiffs examined one pravakar mohapatra, a ..... requirement of law to record a finding about existence of any of the aforesaid two conditions in support of the claim of the plaintiffs on the basis of ext. 1.5. learned counsel for the appellants referred to the evidence of the d.ws. and states that defendants have failed to prove a case of jointness and therefore, plaintiffs' case should ..... plaintiffs in the case of raghab jagatsingh (expunged) indra dalai and ors. v. sanei dalai and ors., 1974 (2) cwr 1021, and heram patel v. parikhita patel and ors., 64 (1987) clt 448, are of no assistance to the contention of the appellants.6. after analysing the pleadings of the parties, the evidence on record and the findings recorded by the court below .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 2003 (HC)

Mahendra Mahanta and ors. Vs. Smt. Tarini Dei and ors.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Apr-09-2003

Reported in : AIR2003Ori180; 96(2003)CLT182

..... that the plaintiffs have acquired interest in the property by gift from their mother. therefore, they have stepped into the shoes of their mother. under the circumstances the petition filed by the defendant under section 4 of the partition act was not maintainable and was liable to be dismissed as premature. at the same time keeping in view the object and purpose of preserving unity ..... are entitled without any qualification to a right of residence, but the daughter only if she suffers from any of the afore-mentioned disabilities. if this be the interpretation as some of the commentators on the subject have thought it to be, it would lead to a highly unjust result for a married grand ..... when the female heir is the daughter, she is entitled to a right of residence in the dwelling house so long as she suffers from any one of the four disabilities i.e. (1) being unmarried; (2) being a deserted wife; (3) being a separated wife; and (4) being a widow. it may appear that female heirs other than the daughter ..... defendant no. 1. but defendant no. 1 having refused to give their share, therefore, they filed the suit for partition.5. the defendants 1 to 13 are the descendants of birbal mohanta, who had 3 sons. although all of them had been made parties to the suit, but the plaintiffs have particularly sought relief against the defendants 1 to 3. the defendants 4 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 17 2003 (HC)

Hrushikesh Das and ors. Vs. Shree Shree Brundaban Jew Thakura and ors.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Jun-17-2003

Reported in : 96(2003)CLT148

..... and in that context they sought to get declaration that sale deeds executed on 5.5.71 and 8.7.61 to be void and also they have claimed for the relief under section 4 of the partition act. after taking note of the citations relied on by the parties but accepting contention of the petitioner relating to the consolidation operation having gone to ..... the stage as provided under section 15 of the act, learned civil judge, following the ratio in the case of somanath ..... bhataria v. purnananda bhataria and ors., 1991 (i) olr 445 rejected the petition. that order is under ..... of the partition act does not abate.'learned counsel for the plaintiff-opposite party also argued that the impugned order indicates that the consolidation proceeding for the suit locality has already proceeded to section 15 stage and under such circumstance, an order of abatement, should not be recorded. in support of that contention, he relied on the case of somanath bhataria v. punananda .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 2003 (HC)

Sanatan Sahu (Dead) After Him His L.Rs. Smt. Dula and ors. Vs. Naran B ...

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Mar-14-2003

Reported in : 96(2003)CLT50

..... only a homestead land and that to such property is in their possession, therefore the provision under section 44 of the t.p. act may not be invokable at this stage.5. section 4 of the partition act reads as hereunder :'4. partition suit by transferee of share in dwelling house : (1) where a share of a dwelling ..... therefore the same is liable to be set aside, in other words, the judgment of the court below granting to the plaintiffs the relief under section 4 of the partition act is set aside. accordingly, the impugned decree stands modified to that extent.7. in the result, the appeal is allowed on contest against ..... of the plaintiffs be allotted to the share of the plaintiffs and possession of the be delivered to the plaintiff through court. (b) relief under section 4 of the partition act be given to the plaintiffs in respect of lands purchased by defendants 13 to 24 out of the 'c' schedule lands. (c) the ..... said rights after affording due opportunity of hearing to all parties.6. coming to the prayer of the appellants, in view of the settled position of law, ..... the plaintiffs shall be found entertainable under law then any finding in this judgment shall not be construed as an impediment to decide such claim in lawful manner. the aforesaid observation will meet the ends of justice to cater to the needs of the parties for a proper adjudication of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 25 2003 (SC)

Calcutta Gujrati Education Society and anr. Vs. Calcutta Municipal Cor ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-25-2003

Reported in : AIR2003SC4278; JT2003(Suppl2)SC52; 2003(6)SCALE802; (2003)10SCC533

..... filing a civil suit for recovery of such tax paid on behalf of the tenant, sub-tenant or occupant. such a fiction is required to be incorporated under section 231 of the act because a private party cannot recover tax. if a lessor is obliged to pay a portion of tax leviable on the tenant, the landlord can recover the same not as ' ..... that the statement made therein is correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. (4) [*****] (5) [*****](6) [*****] (7) '184. public notice and inspection of assessment list. -(1) when the annual valuation under sub-section (2) of section 179 or a general revaluation under sub-section (1) of section 180 in any ward of the corporation or part thereof, as the case nay be, has been ..... the entire consolidated rate assessed and levied on the whole building, is inequitable. the relevant provision contained in section 189(5) and (6) read thus:'(5) any owner or person liable to payment of consolidated rate may , if dissatisfied with the determination of objection under section 188 appeal to the tribunal: provided that such appeal shall be presented to the tribunal within forty-five ..... if any, at which such land or building might, at the time of assessment, be reasonably expected to let from year to year in terms of section 174 of the 1980 act', 12. further, sub-section (5) of section 178 obligates the municipal commissioner to supply on payment necessary information to owner, lessee or occupier about the apportionment of the 'consolidated rate' of such property .....

Tag this Judgment!


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