Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: partition act 1893 section 5 representation of parties under disability Year: 2010 Page 1 of about 38 results (0.320 seconds)

Feb 03 2010 (FN)

Horagalage Sopinona Vs. Kumara Ratnakeerthi Pitipanaarachchi and Other ...

Court : Sri Lanka Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-03-2010

..... been expressly provided in section 23(3) of the partition act of 1951 that where a survey made on a commission issued by court in a partition case discloses that the land described in the plaint is only a portion of a larger land which should have been made the subject matter of the action, the court shall specify the party to the action by ..... of the partition act no. 16 of 1951 which applied at the time of institution of the action from which this appeal arises. in fact, dicta from the judgement of layard, c.j. were quoted with approval by g.p.s de silva, c.j. in gnanapandithen and another v. balanayagam and another [1998] 1 sri lr 391 which was decided under the provisions ..... of the current legislation on the subject, namely, the partition law no. 21 of 1977, as subsequently amended, which replaced the partition act of 1951. a basic principle in all the enactments is that where there has ..... under the birth right of her deceased husband remanis, as an heir of jeeris. learned presidents counsel for the appellant emphasised that jeeris and haramanis, being co-owners, their undivided rights cannot be prescribed by each other, in the absence of clear evidence of ouster or something equivalent to ouster. he relied on the decisions of our court in corea v .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 10 2010 (HC)

Golok Lall Seal. Vs. Dsk Real Estate Limited and ors.

Court : Kolkata Appellate

Decided on : Dec-10-2010

..... . bagchi as recorded above. 14. with regard to second contention of mr. bagchi regarding section 22 of the specific relief act, this court holds that claiming relief for partition in a suit for specific performance of contract by the plaintiff is not mandatory under section 22 of the specific relief act as the said provision incorporates the expression may instead of shall therein. the use of ..... of the contract by specific performance against the defendant no.1. the plaintiff has also prayed for several reliefs by way of declaration and injunction against all the defendants/opposite parties herein including some of the defendants with whom admittedly there was no contract with the plaintiff, in the following set of facts:- (i) admittedly the suit property being premises no ..... me now consider as to how far the learned trial judge was justified in passing the impugned order in the facts of the instant case. 5. it is well-settled that while considering an application under order 7 rule 11 of the code of civil procedure, the court is required to consider the pleadings made out by the plaintiff in the plaint ..... property to the plaintiff for a period of 71 years with a right of renewal of the said lease. pursuant to the said agreement of lease, a sum of rs.5 lakh 51 thousand had already been paid by the plaintiff to the defendant no.1 by way of part payment of the consideration money and/or on account of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 08 2010 (SC)

Kammana Sambamurthy (D) by Lrs. Vs. Kalipatnapu Atchutamma (D) and ors ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-08-2010

..... the learned counsel merits no consideration."in our opinion, the high court has rightly concluded that at the present stage, section 4 of the partition act, 1893 is not attracted. it is only after the sale deed is executed in favour of the vendee that right under section 4 of the partition act, 1893 may be available. similarly, insofar as vendee is concerned, he has right to apply for ..... the vendee has the right to apply for the partition of the property and get the share demarcated. hence there would not be any difficulty in granting specific performance of the contract to the extent to which it is binding between the parties."23. in the case of a. abdul rashid khan (dead) & ors. v. p.a.k.a. shahul hamid & ors.3 ..... , this court held that even where any property is held jointly and once any party to the contract has agreed to sell such joint property by agreement, then ..... , even if the other co-sharer has not joined, at least to the extent of his share, the party to the contract is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 11 2010 (SC)

Maharashtra Land Development Corporation and ors. Vs. State of Maharas ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-11-2010

..... state government on the appointed day i.e. august 30, 1975. accordingly, on october 8, 1975, the sub- divisional officer, bombay sub-urban district, in exercise of power under section 5 of the act, issued notice to the company to hand over possession of the entire land of survey no. 345-a admeasuring 209 acres. the company filed a reply to the said ..... appellant-corporation would hand over possession of the land to the sub-divisional officer. pursuance of the consent terms arrived at between the parties, the sub-divisional officer conducted fresh inquiry under section 6 of the act, after issuing necessary notice to the appellant-corporation herein. after hearing the appellant-corporation, the sub-divisional officer, by an order dated 23rd april ..... no. 512 of 1976, however, came to be settled on the basis of consent terms arrived at between the parties on 19th april, 1984. the consent terms, inter alia, provided that fresh inquiry will be conducted under section 6 of the act regarding vesting of the property admeasuring 53 acres in possession of the appellant- corporation. it was also ordered that in ..... " as also judgment and order dated march 20, 1976 passed by revenue tribunal confirming the order passed by sub-divisional officer. the orders were not challenged by the aggrieved party and they had become final. the appellant-corporation herein challenged the above decisions, contending that they were inter alia in violation of principles of natural justice. the said miscellaneous .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 2010 (HC)

Pushpalatha N.V. W/O Nemraj Vs. V. Padma Widow of Vasantha Kumar D.N.,

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Mar-19-2010

..... of the parties, the daughter of a coparcener was conferred a right in such property equal to that of a son.79. therefore, the concept of partition and severance of the status as under hindu law has no application under the act in view of the definition of partition by way of explanation to sub-section (5) of section 6 of the act and it is only such partitions which are ..... jawaharlai nehru, the then prime minister of india expressed his unequivocal commitment to carry out reforms to remove the disparities and disabilities suffered by hindu women. as a consequence, despite the resistance of the orthodox section of the hindus, the hindu succession act, 1956 was enacted and came into force on 17th june, 1956. it. applies to all the hindus including buddhists, jains ..... creates new obligations and imposes new duties, or attaches new disabilities in respect of transactions already past.93. the parliament in india is endowed with plenary powers of legislation and it is competent to legislate with prospective or retrospective effect. retrospective legislation is one of the incidents of plenary legislative powers. under the constitution there is only one restriction imposed upon the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 2010 (HC)

Narendra Kumar Vs. Chaturbhuj Das Rikhabh Das and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-03-2010

..... declared volition constitution or severing ownership and causes a change of legal relation to the property divided amongst the parties to it, requires registration under section 17(1)(b) of the act, a writing which merely recites that there has in time past been a partition, is not a declaration of will, but a mere statement of fact, and it does not require registration. the ..... which the eviction suit was filed by him. as the question of title is undoubtedly not relevant in eviction matter under the rent control act, therefore, the learned court below does not appear to be justified in rejecting the said evidence as inadmissible.5. consequently, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dtd.25.3.2008 is set aside. no order ..... .3.2008 whereby the learned trial court in a suit filed for eviction against the defendants - tenants held that the agreement dtd.4.5.1991 was a partition-deed which requires registration as per section 17 of the indian registration act and in absence of the same, the said document was not admissible in evidence and therefore, the plaintiff narendra kumar could not have ..... on the decision of hon'ble supreme court in the case of roshan singh v. zile singh reported in air 1988 (sc) 881 that the said family arrangement is merely a document regarding family arrangement between the members of the family and the same does not amount to partition and therefore, no registration of the said document was necessary in order to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 25 2010 (HC)

Master Anant Narayan Rai and anr. Vs. Mr. Siddharth Rai and anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-25-2010

..... procedure, 1908 ('cpc' for brevity) and ia no. 7820/2008 under sections 18, 20 and 23 of protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005 and ia no. 14008/2008 filed by the defendants under order vii rule 11 cpc for rejection of the plaint.2. the plaintiff filed the suit inter alia, seeking partition and rendition of accounts in respect of properties and assets ..... was held in tukaram genba jadhav and ors. v. laxman genba jadhav and anr. : air 1994 bom 247 that hindu succession act, 1956 sections 4(2) & 8 are applicable to agricultural lands also.23. it is also argued that all coparceners have been made parties in the suit. the amending act of 2005 of hindu succession act is not applicable to the instant case. the defendant ..... the maintenance pendente lite considering the income and other factors like status of living and day to day expenses of the parties etc.41. in the present case, the contention of plaintiff no. 2 that she is earning only rs. 5,000/- from the petrol pump is hardly believable and the true picture in this regard will come after recording of the ..... no. 1 as necessary parties in the suit which is for partition of the alleged joint properties.20. ms. pinky anand, learned senior counsel for the plaintiffs argued that the issue of jurisdiction is to be decided on merits along with other issues while deciding the suit at the stage of final disposal. she relied upon rajendra singh v. vijay pal : (2008) 4 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 09 2010 (HC)

Raj Kishore Subudhi @ Barik. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Mar-09-2010

..... schedule property belonging to their ancestor. there is also no dispute that the petitioner and the opposite party no.3 had effected partitioned of their ancestor property in question during the consolidation operation in the year 1982 by filing an application under section 9(3) of the act. while carving 'chakkas' in the mouza, the present property was excluded from being part of any 'chakka ..... bearing c.s. no.92/2005 is now pending before the civil judge (sr. division), puri for the same relief." 5. as far as the jurisdiction of the commissioner, consolidation after publication of section 41(1) notification, under section 37(1) of the act is concerned; the matter is no more res integra. it has been settled by the full bench of this court in ..... gulzar khan v. commissioner of consolidation and others, 76 (1993) clt 161. while considering the powers of the civil court, the ..... commissioner after notification under section 41(1), the full bench has held that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 29 2010 (HC)

Sou. Sitabai Narayanrao Deshmukh (Since Deceased, Through L.Rs. Mrs. S ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-29-2010

Reported in : 2010(112)BomLR1595

..... believe that she was interested person. it is not averred that respondent no. 3 ever disclosed that plaintiff-appellant sitabai was interested party to the special deputy collector holding the enquiry. the express bar under section 41 of the ceiling act is very much applicable in the present case. the order passed by the special deputy collector dated 26.4.1965 is binding on ..... relied upon by the parties.24. on behalf of the appellant, reliance is placed on the cases of (i) manoharrao v. state of maharashtra 1977 mh.l.j. 335, (ii) sadashiv v. state of maharashtra 1977 mh.l.j. 783 and (iii) biharilal v. state of maharashtra 1984 mh.l.j. 729. in these cases, there were genuine transactions of partitions and other bonafide transfers ..... . those were not the cases of collusive suit and fraud to circumvent the provisions of the ceiling act. therefore, ratio in the said cases is not applicable to the facts of ..... the present case.25. learned counsel for the appellants also relied upon a division bench judgment of the bombay high court in husein miya dosumiya v .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 02 2010 (HC)

L.Rs. of Late Sumer Chand and ors. Vs. Laxmi Chand

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-02-2010

Reported in : RLW2010(2)Raj1435

..... month of september, 2002. when the appeal came up for hearing, the appellants-defendant filed an application under section 45 of the indian evidence act read with section 151 cpc being ia no. 106/2010 on 5.1.2010. i have heard learned counsel for the parties on application.5. it is contended by learned counsel for the appellants that the plaintiff-respondent by notice dated 9 ..... for the appellants contended that the plaintiff-respondent has waived his right to recover the possession of his share under the registered partition-deed and therefore, the plaintiff-respondent is esttoped by a principle of estopple as envisaged under section 115 of the indian evidence act to seek the possession of the premises. learned counsel has relied on a decision this court in kumari praveen ..... my view, it is not open for the appellant to now claim that he is sole owner of the property in dispute after having been a party to the partition-deed as also signatory to the partition deed dated 14.11.1972.24. learned counsel for the appellant has relied on a decision of hon'ble supreme court in b.k. sri harsha ..... . residential house situated at chandi hall, jodhpur was originally owned by ummed chand, the father of defendant-sumer chand and plaintiff-laxmi chand. the said immovable property was partitioned by a registered partition-deed on 14.11.1974. the plaintiff claimed that he was in possession of the property of his share till july, 1989 and thereafter, the plaintiff shifted to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

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