Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

MUKHTIAR AHMED versus SMT. HUSAN BANO AND ORS.

Decided
14 February 1996
Judges listed
K. RAMASWAMY, G.B. PATTANAIK (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Dismissed

Citations

Official
[1996] 2 S.C.R. 637 · 1996 INSC 246

Cited by

We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

Unnumbered paragraph

The appellant had laid the suit for declaration of 2/3rd share of the house in his favour, on the premise that he was a co-owner. It is not in dispute that on a previous occasion in a suit filed by the co-sharer, a finding was recorded that he was not entitled for 2/3rd share but to l/5th share. The said decree became final. In view. of the matter, it operates as res judicata as against the co-owners. He cannot claim any share in the suit for 2/3rd share. The High Court, therefore, was right in dismissing the suit. We do not think there is any legality in the finding recorded by the High Court.

p. 637, margin F

Unnumbered paragraph

The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs. G.N. Appeal dismissed.

p. 637, margin G