Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

IQBAL KHAN & ANR versus FAKIR MOHAMMAD @ FAKIRIYA & AN

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


IQBAL KHAN & ANR v FAKIR MOHAMMAD @ FAKIRIYA & AN - CSA Case No. 222 of 1999 [2007] RD-RJ 3335 (13 July 2007)

CSA 222/99

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH

S.B. CIVIL SECOND APPEAL NO.222/99

Iqbal Khan & Anr.

Versus

Fakir Mohammad @ Fakiriya & Anr.

DATE OF ORDER :: 13/07/2007

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI

Mr. D.D. Patodia, for appellant

Mr. Ajay Gupta, for respondents

***

Instant appeal has been filed by plaintiff- appellant assailing the judgments of learned trial Judge and so also of learned Appellate

Court whereby the suit filed for permanent injunction and demolition of construction against defendants-respondents has been dismissed.

Appellant came with a specific case in his plaint that he purchased Plot Nos.R.40 & R.41 situated in Rana Colony, Jaipur and in front of his house, the defendant on construction of room has encroached the public road which is 30 ft. wide as available in the site plan issued to him by the then the Municipal Corporation or even by

JDA at a later stage and in support of it, Ex.12 site plan & Ex.13 were placed on record to substantiate their statement of fact since this was disputed by defendant-respondents in their

CSA 222/99 written statement. A specific issue No.1 was framed, which is as under:

" .- 2

----

---- ?"

Learned trial Judge after taking into consideration the material decided the same against plaintiff-appellant and the said finding was affirmed on appreciation of documents which appellant additionally placed on record at appellate stage by filing application U/O 41 R.27

CPC as well.

I have considered the submission of both the counsel and perused the finding recorded under order impugned & so also record of the case.

Counsel for appellant has tried to convince this court that the documents referred to by courts below have not been properly appreciated and infact have misread in recording finding and that requires consideration by this court.

After going through the record, this court finds that both the courts below have appreciated documents on record including Ex.12 & 13 on which

CSA 222/99 counsel has stressed upon and concurrent finding of fact has been recorded by both the courts below which does not call for any further interference. No substantial question of law arises in the instant appeal for consideration.

Consequently, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. [AJAY RASTOGI],J.

FRBOHRA,JR.P.A.


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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 |

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