Search Results for "implied ouster"

36 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 36 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Dismisses Revision Application in Possession Dispute - Applicant Challenge to Decree Under Section 6 of Specific Relief Act Fails - Trial Court's Order Restoring Possession Upheld

The High Court dismissed the Civil Revision Application filed by the Applicant-Defendant challenging the Trial Court's decree in Special Civil Suit No...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Damages Suit Under Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 — Civil Court Jurisdiction Not Impliedly Barred. Section 7(4) of the Act Recognizes Concurrent Civil Remedy, Hence Suit for Damages Maintainable.

The appeal arises from a judgment of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court which set aside a decree for damages in favor of the appellant, M. Har...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Land Ownership Dispute — Plaintiff Fails to Prove Title by Adverse Possession Against State Forest Department. Continuous possession for over 50 years not sufficient to establish ownership without clear evidence of hostile possession and ouster of true owner.

The appellant, Tanaji Gulabgir Gosavi, filed a second appeal before the Bombay High Court challenging the concurrent judgments of the trial court and ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal Against Rejection of Plaint in Company Fraud Case. Civil Court Jurisdiction Not Barred Under Section 10GB of Companies Act, 1956 for Fraud Allegations.

The appellants, M/s. Candolim Developers Pvt. Ltd. and its director Sunil Thukral, filed a suit before the Civil Judge Senior Division, Panaji, seekin...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Suit Challenging Slum Land Acquisition as Barred by Section 42 of Maharashtra Slum Areas Act — Preliminary Issue of Bar of Suit Decided in Favor of Defendant No.5.

The suit was filed by the Plaintiffs seeking a declaration of ownership of a plot of land and challenging its acquisition by the State Government unde...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeal in Easement Case — Right of Way Established by Prescription. Plaintiffs' claim for easement of necessity fails due to alternative access, but right of way by prescription under Section 15 of Easements Act, 1882 is upheld based on 20 years of uninterrupted user.

The case involves a dispute over a right of way between two branches of the same family. The plaintiffs, Laxman Sagun Vaigankar and Sitabai Sitaram Va...