AdvocateKhoj
Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library
    

Report No. 86

7.32. Nagpur view.-

The question came up for interpretation before the High Court of Nagpur.1 In that case, the lower Appellate Court had dismissed the claim under section 4. The High Court, allowing the appeal, passed an elaborate decree to the effect that the claimants under section 4 shall deposit in the trial court a specified sum on or about a certain date for payment to the transferee for purchase of his share, and, on such deposit being made within the time fixed the amount shall be paid to the transferee, and the claimants "shall become owners of two-thirds share of the plaintiff in the site in suit. ", and the plaintiff's claim for partition and separate possession stands dismissed. In case defendants 2 and 3 fail to deposit the same, their claim under section 4 shall stand dismissed and the plaintiff shall be entitled to apply to the trial court for partition of his share. It may be noted, that in this case the decree itself vested the share in the claimant under section 4.

1. Sumitra v. Dhannu, AIR 1952 Nag 193 (195), paras. 15 and 16.



The Partition Act, 1893 Back




Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys