Partition suit -- Plaintiffs were co-sharer of suit land - Land was still joint and it was never partitioned - Concurrent findings of facts on record that there was status of jointness and plaintiffs were entitled to decree of partition - No interference warranted in said findings...........
Custody of child -- Matter remitted to Family Court to decide the application for joint custody, visitation right etc. - However, appellant would be permitted to interact with child in presence of counselor attached to Family Court - Directions issued...........
Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 420, 409, 120B, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 482 -- Cheating - Misappropriation of money - Quashing of charges - Allegation that amount of Rs.2,85,600 was withdrawn under joint signatures of petitioner and co-accused - Money was handed over to Ex Gram Pradhan by co-accused - Case of petitioner is at better footing than co-accused..........
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 35(1)(c), Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 1, Rule 8 -- Consumer complaint - Joint complaint and complaint filed in a representative capacity - Where there are only "a few consumers" and not "numerous consumers" having same interest, they can join together and file a joint complaint - A joint complaint stands in contrast to a..........
Agreement to sell -- Karta of Hindu Joint Family - Karta entered into an agreement to sell who was in need of funds to meet the domestic necessities - Karta enjoys wide discretion in his decision over existence of legal necessity and as to in what way such necessity can be fulfilled...........
Agreement to sell -- Karta of Hindu Joint Family - Legal necessity - Karta entered into an agreement to sell who was in need of funds to meet the domestic necessities - A coparcener cannot seek injunction against Karta restraining him from dealing with or entering into a transaction of sale of Joint Hindu Family Property, albeit post alienation has right to challenge the..........
Agreement to sell -- Karta of Hindu Joint Family - Karta entered into an agreement to sell who was in need of funds to meet the domestic necessities - Signatures of son of Karta on agreement to sell is not required - Karta is entitled to execute the agreement to sell and even alienate the suit property - Absence of signatures of son of Karta on agreement to sell does not..........
Agreement to sell -- Karta of Hindu Joint Family - Legal necessity - Karta entered into an agreement to sell who was in need of funds to meet the domestic necessities - Legal necessity is unpredictable and depends upon facts of each case...........
Hindu Joint Family Property -- Alienation by Karta - Where a Karta has alienated Joint Hindu Family Property for value either for legal necessity or for benefit of estate it would bind the interest of all undivided members of the family even when they are minors or widows...........
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 100 -- Second appeal - Suit for mandatory injunction - Removal of construction - Property in question is joint - Proceedings were pending before Consolidation authorities and no attempt was made by plaintiff to get their shares demarcated - At no point plaintiff ever sought relief of partition - Even, in absence of substantive relief and..........
