REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Bhimasi Fakirappa Bijjur Appellant

V/S

Nagesh Bhimappa Waddar Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

RAM SUNDAR LAL AND ANOTHER VS. LACHHMI NARAIN [REFERRED TO]
GURUPAD KHANDAPPA MAGDUM VS. HIRABAI KHANDAPPA MAGDUM [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX KANPUR VS. CHANDER SEN [REFERRED TO]
SHYAMA DEVI VS. MANJU SHUKLA MRS [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA PILLAI RAJASEKHARAN NAIR VS. PADMANABHA PILLAI [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE VS. ACHARYA JAGADISHWARANANDA AVADHUTA [REFERRED TO]
ANATHULA SUDHAKAR VS. P BUCHI REDDY [REFERRED TO]
SUHRID SINGH ALIAS SARDOOL SINGH VS. RANDHIR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
VELIVELLI SYDULU VS. GUNTUPALLI VENKATESWARLU [REFERRED TO]
MUTHIALPET BENEFIT FUND LTD VS. V DEVARAJULU CHETTY [REFERRED TO]
GANAPATI SANTARAM BHOSALE VS. RAMACHANDRA SUBBARAO KULKARNI [REFERRED TO]
VADDE SANNA HULUGAPPA VS. VADDE SANNA [REFERRED TO]
UTTAM VS. SAUBHAG SINGH & ORS. [REFERRED TO]
VAJJIRAM VS. ANNADURAI [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals arise out of the impugned judgment and decree dtd. 10/9/2001 passed in O.S.No.155/2001 by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Muddebihal (for short the trial Court'), whereby the suit for partition and separate possession in respect of the suit schedule immovable properties filed by the plaintiffs (respondent Nos.1 to 6 in both the appeals) against the appellants-defendant Nos.2 to 11 and respondent No.7-defendant No.1 was decreed by the trial Court in favour of the plaintiffs against the defendants.

(2.) RFA No.1012/2001 is preferred by defendant Nos.3 to 7 and 11, while RFA No.23/2002 is preferred by defendant Nos.8 to 10.

(3.) The fact leading to the present appeals may be briefly stated as under:

Click here to view full judgment.

BHIMASI FAKIRAPPA BIJJUR Vs. NAGESH BHIMAPPA WADDAR

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address