REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

STATE OF U.P. Appellant

V/S

ASHOK KUMAR Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

PANCHDEO RARAIN SRIVASTAVA V. KM. JYOTI SAHAY & ANR. [REFERRED TO]
FIRM SRINIWAS RAM KUMAR VS. MAHABIR PRASAD [REFERRED TO]
L J LEACH AND CO LIMITED VS. JARDINE SKINNER AND CO [REFERRED TO]
MODI SPINNING AND WEAVING MILLS COMPANY LIMITED VS. LADHA RAM AND CO [REFERRED TO]
MODI SPINNING AND WEAVING MILLS COMPANY LIMITED VS. LADHA RAM AND CO [REFERRED TO]
GANESH TRADING CO VS. MOJI RAM [REFERRED TO]
PANCHDEO NARAIN SRIVASTAVA VS. KM JYOTI SAHAY [REFERRED TO]
BASAVAN JAGGU DHOBI VS. SUKHNANDAN RAMDAS CHAUDHARY DEAD [REFERRED TO]
AKSHAYA RESTAURANT VS. P ANJANAPPA [REFERRED TO]
HEERALAL VS. KALYANMAL [REFERRED TO]
B K N PILLAI VS. P PILLAI [REFERRED TO]
BALDEV SINGH VS. MANOHAR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. M P MOHLA [REFERRED TO]
USHA BALASHAHEB SWAMI VS. KIRAN APPASO SWAMI [REFERRED TO]
USHA BALASHAHEB SWAMI VS. KIRAN APPASO SWAMI [REFERRED TO]
REVAJEETU BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS VS. NARAYANASWAMY AND SONS [REFERRED TO]
GANPAT SINGH VS. SHER BAHADUR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
BALAJI MOHAPRABHU VS. NARASINGHA KAR [REFERRED TO]
PADMINI MISHRA VS. RAMESH CHANDRA MISHRA [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri P. P. Chaudhary, learned counsel for the appellants, Shri M. D. Singh Shekhar, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Vikash Budhwar, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record.

(2.) In nutshell, the controversy involved in the present case is that the plaintiff-respondents filed a suit for permanent injunction registered as Regular Suit No.160 of 1999 inter alia stating therein that Khasra No.49 Rakba 10-5-0 belongs to them, recorded as Bhumidhar in the Revenue record. They had given a permission to Shri Chhuttan/thekedar to use the part of land as a way for the purpose of mining in the adjacent land. So, the defendant may be restrained from interfering in any manner on the land in dispute.

(3.) On the basis of the pleadings/evidence on record, the trial court passed a judgment and decree dated 19.1.2001that the defendants-appellants should not interfere in the possession of the plaintiffs over the land in dispute but restrain the thekedar Sri Chuttan from using the way of Khasra Plot No.49 for the mining purpose.

Click here to view full judgment.

STATE OF U.P. Vs. ASHOK KUMAR

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address