HARDEO RAI versus SAKUNTALA DEVI AND OTHERS
There was no evidence to show joint possession; appellant admitted to separate possession; property was partitioned; suit for specific performance rightly decreed as appellant's co-sharers did not object for many years and Section 20 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 discretionary jurisdiction properly exercised.
- Parties
- Appellant: Hardeo Rai; Respondents: Sakuntala Devi and Others
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 29 April 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Patna High Court
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Specific Performance, Joint Family Property, Mitakshara Coparcenary, Partition, Sale Agreement
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Hardeo Rai
Appellant
Sakuntala Devi and Others
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Patna High Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the property subject of the agreement was joint family property or partitioned and in separate possession
- 2 Whether the appellant was compelled to sign the agreement under duress
- 3 Whether specific performance of the agreement for sale can be granted under Section 20 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
Ratio Decidendi
There was no evidence to show joint possession; appellant admitted to separate possession; property was partitioned; suit for specific performance rightly decreed as appellant's co-sharers did not object for many years and Section 20 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 discretionary jurisdiction properly exercised.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed with costs; counsel's fee assessed at Rs. 10,000/-
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment