In this second appeal, the appellants challenged the lower courts' concurrent finding that consideration money for a disputed sale of land was paid. The single-judge bench held the issue is one of fact and dismissed the appeal for lack of substantial question of law.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
S.A No. 57 of 2016
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.
For the Appellant(S) : Mr. Sarju Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent :
11/10.03.2022
This second appeal has been filed under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code by the plaintiffs-appellants herein.
-2-
He submits that the land was duly mutated in the name of purchaser and since the amount has not been paid in terms of promise, the sale deed needs to be cancelled and set aside. He submits that this evidence has not been well appreciated by the trial court nor by the first appellate court, thus he submits that this appeal should be heard on the question of law which is formulated and mentioned in the memo of appeal.
(ANANDA SEN , J)
anjali/cp2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the consideration money for the sale of land has been paid to the sellers.
Whether the High Court can re-appreciate facts under Section 100 CPC when lower courts have made a concurrent finding.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Md. Eliyas, Md. Haroon, Md. Irfan
Mithlesh Prasad, Smt. Kunti Devi
Ananda Sen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
