Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Narayan Vs. Poonam Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravi Shankar Jha

Narayan vs Poonam Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravi Shankar Jha

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Jan 22, 2014
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1120145

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Narayan

Advocate Shri. Sameer Seth

Respondent

Poonam Judgement Given By: Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravi Shankar Jha

Excerpt

second appeal no.655/2013 (narayan versus poonam and others.22.01.2014 heard shri sameer seth, learned counsel for the appellant on the question of admission. this appeal has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by judgment and decree dated 03.05.2013 passed in c.a.no.20a/2011 by additional district judge, khandwa affirming and conforming the judgment and decree dated 07.04.2011 passed by the ii civil judge, class-ii, khandwa in c.s.no.15-a/10 whereby the suit for declaration, partition and possession filed by the appellant has been dismissed. it is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the suit was filed on the allegation that the plaintiff and the defendants belong to the same family and therefore the property in question is a joint property in which the appellant has half share. it is submitted that courts below have dismissed the suit filed by the appellant/ plaintiff by stating that the plaintiff was not the member of the joint family and he has failed to establish the same on the basis of oral and documentary evidence on record. it is stated that the aforesaid finding recorded by the courts below is pervers.as the courts below have failed to appreciate and take into consideration the documents ex. p/8 and p/9 which are the birth certificate of the appellant. it is stated that on account of the aforesaid, the impugned judgment suffers from perversity giving rise to the substantial question of law for being adjudicated by this court. having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and having perused the impugned judgment, it is seen that in paragraphs 10 and 11 the trial court and in para 21 of the appellate court have considered both the aforesaid documents and have recorded a finding to the effect that ex. p/8 which is a birth certificate mentions the name of one budhiya who was born to sitaram and ex. p/9 which is school certificate mentions the name of narayan but there is no document or evidence on record to indicate that budhiya

Full Judgment

Second Appeal No.655/2013 (Narayan versus Poonam and otheRs.22.01.2014 Heard Shri Sameer Seth, learned counsel for the appellant on the question of admission.

This appeal has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by judgment and decree dated 03.05.2013 passed in C.A.No.20A/2011 by Additional District Judge, Khandwa affirming and conforming the judgment and decree dated 07.04.2011 passed by the II Civil Judge, Class-II, Khandwa in C.S.No.15-A/10 whereby the suit for declaration, partition and possession filed by the appellant has been dismissed.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the suit was filed on the allegation that the plaintiff and the defendants belong to the same family and therefore the property in question is a joint property in which the appellant has half share.

It is submitted that courts below have dismissed the suit filed by the appellant/ plaintiff by stating that the plaintiff was not the member of the joint family and he has failed to establish the same on the basis of oral and documentary evidence on record.

It is stated that the aforesaid finding recorded by the courts below is perveRs.as the courts below have failed to appreciate and take into consideration the documents Ex.

P/8 and P/9 which are the birth certificate of the appellant.

It is stated that on account of the aforesaid, the impugned judgment suffers from perversity giving rise to the substantial question of law for being adjudicated by this court.

Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and having perused the impugned judgment, it is seen that in paragraphs 10 and 11 the trial court and in para 21 of the appellate court have considered both the aforesaid documents and have recorded a finding to the effect that Ex.

P/8 which is a birth certificate mentions the name of one Budhiya who was born to Sitaram and Ex.

P/9 which is school certificate mentions the name of Narayan but there is no document or evidence on record to indicate that Budhiya and Narayan are the same persons.

The aforesaid finding recorded by the courts below is based on proper appreciation of oral and documentary evidence available on record and does not suffer from any perversity.

No oral or documentary evidence is brought to the notice of this court by the counsel for the appellant to indicate that the finding recorded by the court below is contrary to the documents.

No substantial question of law arises for adjudication in the present appeal.

The appeal being meritless is accordingly dismissed.

(R.S.Jha) Judge msp

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial