Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Bihari v. Smt.Chameli & Ors - RSA-1455-1980 [2006] RD-P&H 3657 (4 July 2006)



R.S.A. No.1455 of 1980


Bihari .....Appellant


Smt.Chameli and others ......Respondents Present : Mr.Chandra Singh, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr.Gopi Chand, Advocate for the respondents.


This order shall dispose of two Regular Second Appeals namely 1455 and 2036 of 1980, as they arise from the same judgements and decrees.

These appeals arise from a suit filed by one Bihari son of Tota Ram, praying for a declaration to the effect that he alongwith defendants no.7 to 9 (respondents no.9 to 11 in the present appeal), were owners in possession of the suit land comprised in Khewat No.210/1, Khatauni No.251/1, 252 measuring 7 Kanals 19 Marlas, Khewat No317, Khatauni No.406, 407 measuring 21 Kanals 7 Marlas, Khewat No.390 Khatauni No.502 measuring 19 Kanals 6 Marlas, Khewat No.430/1 Khatauni No.571 and 572 measuring 22 Kanals, total measuring 70 Kanals 12 Marlas, fully described in the Jamabandi of the year 1970-71.

Vide judgement and decree dated 14.3.1977, the Senior Sub Judge,Narnaul, decreed the suit to the extent of 19/24 share. In appeal, the Additional District Judge,Narnaul, reversed the decree in part.

Counsel for the respondents in RSA No.1455 of 1980 submits that during the pendency of the present appeal, Bihari passed away. His legal representatives: Ram Gopal (his son) and widow have sold the share decreed in favour of Bihari, to the respondents. He further states that in view of the aforementioned facts, the present appeal has been rendered infructuous and may be disposed of as such.

Counsel for the appellant pleads no instructions.

I have perused a copy of the sale deed that has been produced in Court and am satisfied as to correctness of the submissions made by counsel for the respondents. It appears that during the pendency of the present appeal, Bihari passed away and his share in the property, as decreed in his favour by the learned Courts below, was sold by his legal representatives, to the respondents.

In view of the aforementioned facts, as the lis that led to the initiation of the present litigation no longer survives, the present appeal has been rendered infructuous and is disposed of as such.

R.S.A. No.2036 of 1980

Counsel for the appellant states that in view of the facts narrated herein above, this appeal be also dismissed as infructuous.

Ordered accordingly.

5.7.2006 ( RAJIVE BHALLA )



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.