Dhonar v. Sardi
Case brief
What is this about?
In a second appeal arising from a partition suit, the High Court dismissed the appeal. Upholding the lower courts findings that a previous partition existed based on separate possession records and circumstances, the court ruled that no evidence proved a lack of prior partition, holding the suit was correctly dismissed.
What did the court decide?
The second appeal was dismissed. No order as to costs.
What the court decided
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA: CUTTACK
SA No.282 of 1990
From the judgment and decree dated 15.9.1989 and 28.9.1989 respectively passed by Sri P.N. Patnaik, learned Addl. District Judge, Jeypore in T.A. No.17 of 1989 (T.A. No.31 of 1988) confirming the judgment and decree dated 30.7.1988 and 12.8.1988 respectively passed by Sri M.K. Mohanty, learned Subordinate Judge, Jeypore in T.S. No.7 of 1984.
Dhonar Bhotra …. Appellant
Versus Sardi Bhotruni & others …. Respondents For Appellant … Mrs. Rajalaxmi Biswal, Adv. For Respondents … Mr. P.K. Das, Adv.
J U D G M E N T
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.RATH
Date of hearing: 28.03.2018 : Date of judgment: 09.04.2018
- Dr. A.K.Rath, J The plaintiff is the appellant against a confirming judgment in a suit for partition.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the courts below erred in dismissing the suit for partition solely on the ground of a previous partition when the properties were jointly recorded in the settlement record of right.
Whether the finding of a prior partition based on separate notes of possession in the record of right and circumstances of separate residence constitutes a perverse finding.
Whether the substantial question of law regarding the validity of the lower courts dismissal was rightly answered.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Dhonar Bhotra
- respondent
Sardi Bhotruni
Coram
A.K. Rath
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court