Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXIII Rule 3

Supreme Court Clarifies Requirements for Valid Compromise Decrees in Property Disputes: Amro Devi & Ors. vs. Julfi Ram (Deceased) Thr.Lrs. & Ors. (2024) INSC 527 (15 July 2024)

/ Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXIII Rule 3, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 with Section 52

Supreme Court Clarifies Requirements for Valid Compromise Decrees in Property Disputes Date of the Judgment: 15 July 2024 Citation: (2024) INSC 527 Judges: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Can a simple statement in court lead to a valid compromise decree, especially when it concerns property rights? The Supreme Court of India recently […]

Supreme Court Clarifies Requirements for Valid Compromise Decrees in Property Disputes: Amro Devi & Ors. vs. Julfi Ram (Deceased) Thr.Lrs. & Ors. (2024) INSC 527 (15 July 2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court restricts amendment of pleadings at fag end of trial: Basavaraj vs. Indira (2024) INSC 151

/ Amendment of Pleadings, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order VI Rule 17, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXIII Rule 3, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Article 59

Supreme Court on Amendment of Pleadings: Basavaraj vs. Indira (2024) INSC 151 Date of the Judgment: February 29, 2024 Citation: 2024 INSC 151 Judges: C.T. Ravikumar, J., Rajesh Bindal, J. Can a party amend their pleadings at the fag end of a trial to introduce a new claim, especially when a previous compromise decree exists?

Supreme Court restricts amendment of pleadings at fag end of trial: Basavaraj vs. Indira (2024) INSC 151 Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Inheritance Rights in Ancestral Property Partition: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo & Ors. vs. Charulata Sahu & Ors. (29 March 2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XLI Rule 22, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXIII Rule 3, Coparcenary Rights, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 6, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Inheritance Rights in Ancestral Property Partition LEGAL ISSUE: The central legal question revolves around the inheritance rights of daughters in ancestral property under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, particularly concerning the impact of the 2005 amendment. CASE TYPE: Civil, Property Partition Case Name: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo & Ors. vs. Charulata Sahu

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Inheritance Rights in Ancestral Property Partition: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo & Ors. vs. Charulata Sahu & Ors. (29 March 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Equal Rights in Ancestral Property, Invalidates Prior Settlement: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo vs. Charulata Sahu (2023) INSC 3192 (29 March 2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XLI Rule 22, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXIII Rule 3, Coparcenary Rights, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 6, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Equal Rights in Ancestral Property, Invalidates Prior Settlement: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo vs. Charulata Sahu (2023) INSC 3192 (29 March 2023) LEGAL ISSUE: The core legal issue revolves around the interpretation of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as amended in 2005, concerning the rights of daughters in ancestral property

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Equal Rights in Ancestral Property, Invalidates Prior Settlement: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo vs. Charulata Sahu (2023) INSC 3192 (29 March 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restores Consent Decree in Property Dispute: Hemantha Kumar vs. R. Mahadevaiah (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXIII Rule 3, Compromise of suits, Judges, M.R. Shah, Property Law, Sale Agreement, Specific Performance

Supreme Court Restores Consent Decree in Property Dispute: Hemantha Kumar vs. R. Mahadevaiah (2022) Date of the Judgment: July 11, 2022 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 4108 of 2022 Judges: M.R. Shah, J. and B.V. Nagarathna, J. Can a consent decree, agreed upon by all parties and initially approved by a trial court, be overturned simply

Supreme Court Restores Consent Decree in Property Dispute: Hemantha Kumar vs. R. Mahadevaiah (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies the Bar on Suits Challenging Compromise Decrees in Family Property Disputes: R. Janakiammal vs. S.K. Kumarasamy (30 June 2021)

/ Ashok Bhushan, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXIII Rule 3, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXIII Rule 3A, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 10, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 14, Judges, R. Subhash Reddy

Supreme Court Clarifies the Bar on Suits Challenging Compromise Decrees: R. Janakiammal vs. S.K. Kumarasamy (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a separate suit can be filed to challenge a compromise decree. CASE TYPE: Civil Property Dispute Case Name: R. Janakiammal vs. S.K. Kumarasamy(Deceased) Through Legal Representatives and Others Judgment Date: 30 June 2021 Date of the

Supreme Court Clarifies the Bar on Suits Challenging Compromise Decrees in Family Property Disputes: R. Janakiammal vs. S.K. Kumarasamy (30 June 2021) Read Post »

Scroll to Top