Search Results for "certificate does not confer title"

474 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 474 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal by Original Defendants Against Restoration of Plaint in Title Dispute. The Court Held That Civil Court Jurisdiction to Adjudicate Title is Not Ousted by Indian Succession Act, 1925 or Bombay Regulation, 1827, as Heirship Certificate Confers No Right to Property.

The appeal arose from an order of the lower appellate court setting aside the rejection of a plaint and restoring a civil suit. The original defendant...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal in Property Dispute Over Succession and Title — Upholds Trial Court's Finding That Plaintiff Failed to Prove Ownership. Succession Certificate Not Conclusive Proof of Title; Plaintiff Must Establish Independent Right to Property.

The appellant, Madhukar Venkatesh Ullal, filed a suit in the Bombay High Court seeking declaration of title and possession of a property. He claimed t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Tenancy Dispute — Section 32M Certificate Conclusive Proof of Ownership. Certificate issued under Section 32M of Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 is conclusive evidence of tenant's purchase and civil court cannot ignore it.

The appellant, Pushpalata Narayan Thorbole, filed a second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 1.4.2014 passed in Regular Civil Appeal No. 14...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Deemed Conveyance Under MOFA Due to Fraud and Leasehold Rights | Asian Chemical Industries Case (2026)

The Bombay High Court, in M/s. Asian Chemical Industries v. Vijay Kailas Industrial Premises CHS Ltd. & Ors. (Writ Petition No. 11164 of 2024, dec...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Suit for Declaration of Title and Possession in Property Dispute Between Brothers. Consent Decree and Subsequent Transfers Bar Reopening of Title Under Section 9A CPC.

The plaintiff, Naresh Lachmandas Aswani, filed a suit against his brother Haridas (defendant no.1) and two companies (defendant nos.2 and 3) seeking a...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Dismisses Appeal in Land Title Dispute Against BDA and State — Plaintiffs Fail to Prove Title and Possession. Suit for Declaration and Possession Dismissed as Plaintiffs Could Not Establish Ownership Over Property Allegedly Acquired by BDA.

The appeal arises from a judgment and decree dated 09.03.2007 passed by the IX Additional City Civil Judge, Bengaluru, in O.S.No.9426/1997, dismissing...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Property Dispute Over Will Validity and Adverse Possession. The court held that the Will was not proved but the defendants failed to prove adverse possession, remanding for fresh consideration.

The dispute concerns a property at Calangute known as 'Sullachi Nhat' with a house, originally owned by Joao Francisco Lobo and his wife Joanita Lobo....

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Property Dispute, Upholds Prior Sale as Valid Despite Unregistered Deed. Subsequent Purchaser's Deed Declared Void Ab Initio Due to Notice of Earlier Sale Under Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

The dispute pertains to a portion of land admeasuring 1.70 hectares out of Survey No.13/1 of village Shelavli, Palghar. The plaintiffs (Respondent Nos...