{"id":48583,"date":"2008-06-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-06-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008"},"modified":"2014-09-07T05:36:36","modified_gmt":"2014-09-07T00:06:36","slug":"bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008","title":{"rendered":"Bahseer Sab S\/O Dada Saheb vs Isaq Baig S\/O Ahmed Baig on 19 June, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Bahseer Sab S\/O Dada Saheb vs Isaq Baig S\/O Ahmed Baig on 19 June, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: A.S.Bopanna<\/div>\n
,<\n\n1\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT 0;: KARNATAKA, BANGAL0_RE "'L--\u00ab.VT: \n\nDATED THIS THE 1911* DAY 09 JUNE  if   " '\n\nBEFORE   \n\nTHE HOIWBLE MR. JUSTICE"- A  B-\u00a7;)PANNA    '\n\n \n\nREGULAR SECOND APPEM,   \n\nBETWEEN:\n\nBASHEER SAB 3\/0 DADA' $AHEB'_'A _\n62 YRS, 12\/o GOPALPUR ROAD," ' _ i   " .\nCHITRADURGA    --   \n\n(BY SR! 3 V TILGLJE; M519 sin NE.#:;LA'KA1\u00a7?m\u00e9E\u00e9;'PUJAR, ADVS)\n\nAND: . Z _ _\n1 ISAC! Ewe s'\/0 Aiim\ufb01b\ufb01\u00e9le\nSIYEARS - 2 I 'v\n\nwe _GOPA}J?UR' ROAD .\n_~ *\u20ac3..H{';*\u00a73_AxDURCs:*s TQWN\n\n' - .. _S1NCEDEi%D_ BY ms ms\n1(;\u00bb.:;_ B5.i3AJAl_\u20ac. _  V V "\nA S\/O ISA-Q BAIG\n"-44tAGs:,':'4-.';:\u00a5EA;2s\n_ RESIDING AT GOPALPUR ROAD\n A CHETRAEDURGA\n\n     r3'HooBAMMA W\/O ISAQ BAIG\n\n75 YRS, R\/O GOPALPUR RD\nCHITRADURGA\n\n RESPONDENTS\n\n  "  ~~ {BY SR! 8 M SIDDAPPA, ADV FOR R1(A3}\n\nL\n\n"c\n\n\n\nTHIS RSA IS 911,29 U\/8.100 cm AGAINSR \n\nJUDGMENT AND DEGREE DATED 14.6.1996 PASC3E1"). "-INK.\nR.A.NO.71\/90 ON THE F'iLE OF THE CIV!Lj""'JU})CiE~.;__ \nCHITRADURGA, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND C\u00ab\u00a7C}NFIRMING'''''T "\nTHE JUDGMENT AND DEGREE BATED 11.7.1990 PASSED' {N   \nO.S.N(}.114\/2986 ON THE FILE OF  f'RL.""-AMUNSIFF, V\n\nCHITRADURGA.  \n\nTHIS RSA comm ON FOR' P'IN EaL :1--~r:ARI1\u00a7:;-V\ufb01azs. \n\nTHE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLQWING'\nJunex\ufb01\ufb01g V\nThis appeal is  t13\u00a3:*  plainit\ufb02f in\n\n its judgment dated\n1 1.07.1:-$<:aA<) :1isn.\u00a2is_e\u00a2s\u20aci'j' A: pr the plainti\ufb02i The p}aintiff\n\ntherefore  Yam    R.A.No.71\/90 before the F1rs' t\n\n  Court.  Appellatr: Court by its judgment\n\n has dismissed the appeal filed by the\n\n _ themrme is before this Court in this\n\n _scoo1id  The plaintiff was beibm the Court below\n\n far'. a judgment to declare that the plaintiff is the\n\n  possession of the suit schedule property described\n\n 'jj  schedule to the plaint. The pal\ufb01cs axe referred to in\n\nL\n\n--\n<\/pre>\n
n<\/p>\n
the same rank as as:-3ig11& to them before the    _<\/p>\n
the purpose of convenience and clarity.<\/p>\n
2. The case put forth Vby’   V<\/p>\n
purchased the schedule property’ {Size   13,
\nunder a zegistered sale  daie\ufb01   auxsum of
\nRs.5,000\/- and that he has:   of the<\/p>\n
said property.    Vthe Medelaally<\/p>\n
Grmup    the khata on
\nl’7.04.I9\u00a3\u00a74. The  laying c}aim to the suit.<\/p>\n
 has  the pmperfy as site bearing<\/p>\n
‘ ‘P5<_).8  \ufb02saeeeitiexit N<:).2'73 situated in Gopalapurm<\/p>\n
west 23' and North to South 150' mm the<\/p>\n
bo1.i13;i\u00e9ii'iaee eaT__\u20ac\ufb01d:k:ated in the plaint. The  fer<\/p>\n
  1'\ufb01heve.s_1itv; was however, according to the plaintiff, the<\/p>\n
  eiefezidants who had no right over the pnyperty were<\/p>\n
  with the peaceful possesaittm and enjeyment.<\/p>\n
1<\/span><\/p>\n
‘0<\/p>\n
3. The defendants on being issued wief 5 ~<\/p>\n
summons appeared and \ufb01led the detailed’   u u<\/p>\n
disputing the c}a1In’ put mm by   9′    <\/p>\n
contention of the defendants”:that jag;
\nowner of the pm-pc11y
\nVillage which was   registered sale
\ndeed dated 29.07.1953… The<\/p>\n
defendant No.”1?_i  A  possession and<\/p>\n
enjoymetit\u00e9tttbfe’ tt\ufb01ald\u00e9ii  V? The sa;ui’ ploperty is
\nindicrateqftie me  ‘:_n;_ie\u00ab  eds as Sy.No.33]3P and the<\/p>\n
defendant Ne;!. fenced the southern side of the<\/p>\n
 <    suit pmvperty. The chitin over the<\/p>\n
\u00b0\u00bb_e'eit' 'ss1;es1i;.re by the plainti\ufb01" was disputed by the<\/p>\n
de1eeeenes.sAt\u00ab":e_ <\/p>\n
 .. At 'T   Trial Court on iwticing the rival contentions put<\/p>\n
  the parties has \ufb02amed as many as nine issues fer<\/p>\n
"  Vite' cenaidera\ufb01on.\n<\/p>\n
ls<\/p>\n
5<\/span><\/p>\n
5. In order’ to discharge the burden cast on  ‘ .<\/p>\n
by the said” issues framed’ by the ‘I’na’ 1 Count,   M<\/p>\n
examined himself as PW] and   <\/p>\n
ms 2 and 3 and marked Exs.Pl.  Ek’_e .Pl(a) <\/p>\n
Plfb). The first defendant  111111″  51$
\nthe Commissioner was  The at<\/p>\n
Ex3.D1 to 134 were  Vteythe same, the<\/p>\n
 ‘marited as Exs.C1 to C303).\n<\/p>\n
The   the rival eontentimzte and<\/p>\n
the evidence’   material issues on which the<\/p>\n
 bmdg\ufb01 had   the plaintiff against the plaintiff,<\/p>\n
   was heid in the a\ufb01intnativc to hold that<\/p>\n
{he  Sy.No.33[3 is that of the defendants.<\/p>\n
 _Acxx)fdi11g;1\u00a7f,-\ufb01fze suit was dixmiased. The plaintiff clam)” ing<\/p>\n
   by the same was before the First Appellate<\/p>\n
  R.A..No.7 1\/ 90. The F’i:rst Appellate Court a\ufb01ser re-<\/p>\n
  ~.a13;;Iec:iating the evidence did not differ from the judgment<\/p>\n
J.\n<\/p>\n
‘.\n<\/p>\n
rcndcrcd by the Trial Court and as such, dismissed’  3:l1e<\/p>\n
appeal. The plainti\ufb01 thcmfble, is before this C4:)uIt._…. ‘  <\/p>\n
6. This Court while  \ufb02ic .;\n<\/p>\n
27.06.2005 framed the only sul)al;a11\u00bbA:tig3::’\u20ac;:_t;.1\u00a7:::3ti\u00a7j-igicif. la1if::f0a?b:V”<\/p>\n
oons\ufb01eration which wads as  V. V<\/p>\n
“Whether both the “(:x\u00a7;m\u00a7s\u00a7e\u00e9[uz\u00a7 ‘justified in<\/p>\n
  has failed to prove<\/p>\n
thv\u00e9-A tit}:  ‘  ; and consequently, the<\/p>\n
    any title to the suit<\/p>\n
 gind\u00e9r ‘t1:.e”‘\u00b0 Registered 5.91: Dead at
\n AA   _____ .. e<\/p>\n
— ‘  11;:  to consider the substantial qlwstion of law,<\/p>\n
  Sri s.v. Tilgul, learned counsel appearing for<\/p>\n
   and Sri B.M.Siddappa, learned counsel<\/p>\n
  for the respondents.\n<\/p>\n
4.<\/p>\n
8. Before oonsideling the matter   .<\/p>\n
substantial question of law raised, o1V1\u00a7”aspect”of  dii\ufb01aiii\ufb02l” dd  2<\/p>\n
which requires consideration is the}; 3 4i’r1Vf\u00a3};ai:*:5-;;J<\/p>\n
appeal was concluded, the   for <\/p>\n
\ufb01led a memo undcr Older 23
\nsczeldng leave to withd:”a\u00a7\u00a7””the   Qd;.~L=..%No.1 i\u00e9jdas from
\nwhich this amend   application<\/p>\n
was opposed   \ufb01jdettailed objection<\/p>\n
oentsnd\ufb01lg   in favour of the
\nmsponddilfg  V’\u00a7.d”dg\u00a7ncnt and decree cannot be<\/p>\n
dilutcdat    regard, the learned munsc} tbr<\/p>\n
 the   mlianoc on a decision of the<\/p>\n
 ‘V: Court in the case of RRATHINAVEL<\/p>\n
 Ax%\u00a7\u00a5D;d:;ANOTHER vs. VSIVARAMAN AND OTHERS<\/p>\n
  (1999)4 sec 39 to contend that the withdrawal<\/p>\n
A \u00bb be pcmaitted. I have perused the decision I’CI1dCl’\u20acd<\/p>\n
 ___””d\u00ab.”byV\ufb02t}1c Hmfble Supreme Court. The i-Ion’b1c Supreme Court<\/p>\n
dd  has not1ocd’ that a right is available under Older 23 ‘<\/p>\n
L<\/p>\n
‘1<\/p>\n
Rule 1 of CPC, the \ufb01urtller guidelines with iegard to gra’:it_.\u00bbof<\/p>\n
permission to withttraw is also (.’:5()1′]3idCI’cd by the .,<\/p>\n
Supreme Court. The Hon’b1e Supreme Court has;e’tatee:I  H<\/p>\n
such withdrawal cannot be permitted: as-La Amehtttevr\u00e9 heihziotiiixie,  <\/p>\n
since the ugh’ ts whiell have been  <\/p>\n
either of the parties   mick<\/p>\n
withdrawal.\n<\/p>\n
  dawn by the Hozfble
\nSupreme   for withdrawal is<\/p>\n
perused, that” 1\u00a7u\u00a3”rmh by the appellant see}-ting<\/p>\n
 is3xdue’Htd”‘t}ie mason that the Triai Court has<\/p>\n
 on the gmund that the plaintiff has not<\/p>\n
 pmrperty and the defendants pn)pertu:’ s<\/p>\n
   quitevvti\u00e9\ufb01emnt and ae such, the plaintiff des\ufb01es in retain<\/p>\n
  .. right: to enjoy the pmpelty if such pmperty is not<\/p>\n
 the botmciaxies of the property belonging to the<\/p>\n
H  V  A\u00bb ‘t On this asyect of the mauer, if the facts of the<\/p>\n
J;\n<\/p>\n
o
\nn<\/p>\n
pmscnt case are notcioed, issue Nos.l and 3 w_;l1i_e_:~h vv”9\u00a7*I:{1feVV ~ 3<\/p>\n
framed for considcmtion by the ‘l’nal’   H<\/p>\n
thetneaftcr considered by the First Apji\u00e9llatrt   ‘ ” <\/p>\n
is relating to that aspect of the.  ‘F]} ‘V;g’., ]’. <\/p>\n
well as the First Appellate
\nthat the defendants are  the
\nSy.No.38[ 3. Since such  rendtamd by<\/p>\n
both the Cc:-urts     was to<\/p>\n
oontenda_\u00a5Vthavt’_’  is pmtrhased by tha p1ainti\ufb01’
\nbeing the’\/imjze’ sa\u00e9 ;u;]”   a\ufb01otted by the Pamzhayat in<\/p>\n
favour. of tl3\u00a2_=;”\\’cr::v11\u00a3i:;-.*;’ of  plaintiff, the said’ site in any<\/p>\n
x V’  “nnly t}\u00e9””‘i.5\u00e9\u00a7vrond the pmrpcrty belonging to the<\/p>\n
 A$y;.No.33[3. Therefore, notwithstanding the<\/p>\n
  bctcn rcntiemd by the Courts below, if the<\/p>\n
  _ia:9si. able to establish that the site is beyond the<\/p>\n
   belonging to th\ufb01 dc\ufb01endant by such au\ufb02mcntic<\/p>\n
  or survey, it would always be open to the plain\ufb01\ufb01’<\/p>\n
u to enjoy the said’ pmpe-11y or if the:rc is sue!) an<\/p>\n
1<\/span><\/p>\n
‘4’.\n<\/p>\n
the khata was 3330 changed on 17.04. 1984.  ~<\/p>\n
of the matter, it is not in dmpum thatgnacn  ” ~<\/p>\n
mlating to the change of khata  <\/p>\n
dcfcndmts had opposed the  b\u00a5it-
\nrejected such contention and     khata.
\nThough the plaisnti\ufb01   mag\u00bb. as\ufb01cx\u00e9t of the
\nmatter, I am of \ufb02:-.e vicw  the cast:<\/p>\n
of the dcfcndan_:s,’gu’ ‘;cc’ Eat alai \u00e9;ia:g’e:;”a11–..\u20ac’l1at was reqnimd<\/p>\n
to be    (pf VV1V;cvt:nue entries and the
\nidcnn\ufb01ca’  \ufb01nV:Vn*-::rMfV  was not an issue and as such,
\nthe same;  the defendants.\n<\/p>\n
V  VA   “pmscnt suit, the plain\ufb01\ufb01 was required in<\/p>\n
  befozm the Trial Court, since a dccmc of<\/p>\n
  {hat he is the owner of the pmpcrty had also<\/p>\n
   In that nitgald, except for the oral eanten\ufb01an<\/p>\n
  tile site in questian had been allotted to Papaiah, no<\/p>\n
u has been produced ta establish the title of<\/p>\n
1<\/span><\/p>\n
4<\/span>
\nG<\/p>\n
Papa1ah’ and the manner in which  ham; K ”<\/p>\n
Layout and a Sim had been allotted. Vin  <\/p>\n
Court has come to the oonclussitjiz.
\nsought for a declaratmy   hgv\u00e9 to title
\nof Papaiah. In this Icgaitiifilc   noticing that
\n91113′ 315   the vendor of
\nthe plainizitff ad  in favour
\nof Papaiah,    that th\ufb01 plaintiff has
\nnot     the very evidence
\ntendered PW3′  has been no\ufb01ced by the<\/p>\n
Court,_   \ufb01at only admits that tltzeze is no<\/p>\n
 V’  his favour from the Panchayat for<\/p>\n
  site but has shifted his stand in his cross<\/p>\n
  PW–3 statead that Panchayat executed<\/p>\n
 ‘an sale’   his favour but changed his answer and said<\/p>\n
 I .. tthare was no Iegistcmd document. But ultimately<\/p>\n
  that the panchayat ilzfcmned him that he could take<\/p>\n
 site and aooor\ufb02ingly he took it anti went on paym g<\/p>\n
I<\/p>\n
‘4<\/p>\n
M<\/p>\n
kandayam. In the }7i[!3SE’:’\u00a3l.t fascia, the vendor of t11u_4_ee;”p1\u00ab.’-\u00a21iV’..'”:.’_t_._L_ii’V’\u00a7” _.__ A’
\nhiznaclf is not slut: of his title though having  2-:1
\nwitncas, mom partictuiarly, when  stiff  A <\/p>\n
19.4.1986 claiming declaration based dig ‘\u00a3iV.1e(:c1;.f..”.;1Ic}\u00e91im\u00e91i{a ‘V<\/p>\n
dated 28.6.83, the verasity was   V\n<\/p>\n
13. The statement  ‘ii’-V1: ‘whe\u00e9%ei11 he<\/p>\n
has stated. that the Panch\ufb01nj\ufb01t’  to rctai:n the<\/p>\n
331431′ sittvi;  a\ufb01gi\ufb01a\ufb02y belonged in him.
\nThcmib1\ufb01;–.n\u20acAj\u00a2it:g .:\u00a7vkie11on tcndcmd on behalf of<\/p>\n
the  L\ufb01:e ‘Fria]V–. C\u00a3:_11ft } 1as come to the commzsion that<\/p>\n
 V’   hag  to pmve the title in respect of the<\/p>\n
‘xgaxopfarty;  _ ”\n<\/p>\n
.’ A   \u00e9\ufb02icr aapoct whiclti also mquitt=:s to be notiow<\/p>\n
  ;_i’-5 th\u00e9\ufb01… i\ufb01sue No.3, the burden had been cast. on the
\nV’ Lkwfenaanis to prove with mm to the cwvnemhip of the<\/p>\n
  gi\u00e9\ufb01\u00e9\ufb01\u00e9iant\ufb01 relating to the pmpexty bearing Sy.No.33]3. The<\/p>\n
1:\n<\/p>\n
T1131′ Court has Ie\ufb01altncd to the sale am cgatca  k ”<\/p>\n
on by the dc\ufb01endants and has noti\ufb01ed   <\/p>\n
had purchased the extent of $’\u00a3:n:–..  fa\u00e9titnc\u00e9<\/p>\n
sale deed. Apart fmzm the   said
\nproperties, the Trial   __the documents
\nviz., the reports submittqi.  relating to
\nthe location of   come to the
\noonclusiotn V.   to prove that the
\nlocation   property belonging to
\nthcdc1:’cnVV\u00a7iia;\u00a71tsM.V     1′<\/p>\n
 V.  _   for the appellant strenuously<\/p>\n
 document namely the sale deed dated<\/p>\n
29;7.58  by the defendants to establish their’ title<\/p>\n
 ” ‘gvcr   healing Sy.No.33[3 would indicata: that the<\/p>\n
   boundary indicatnd in the said document is, the<\/p>\n
 \ufb01zntmod by the Municipality. Tlmreibxe it is<\/p>\n
” since aooomm g to the boundary umlayout lies<\/p>\n
J<\/p>\n
r
\n4<\/span><\/p>\n
17<\/span><\/p>\n
29.7.58 relied on by them and ifat__aH_the emeeexweeet \u00b0<\/p>\n
clarm’ any ng]3′ 1: even after estabiishm’     <\/p>\n
Papaiah, such site can only’.  bxayvgtitdv  <\/p>\n
boundary ieeieeted in the   Eby the
\ndefendants and to that   the defendants
\nwould not have any  by the
\nplaintiff but    has failed to
\nestabkish     is beyond the
\n as the present claim
\nmade by   the site number and<\/p>\n
the a3sessmc_ tiit  Trial Court as well as the First<\/p>\n
 e1i””‘t2ssessi11g the am} as well as the<\/p>\n
 available before it including the<\/p>\n
 have come to the conclusion that<\/p>\n
   the area belonging to the defendants. To<\/p>\n
  Vtextent, neither the Trial Court 1101’ the First Appellate<\/p>\n
 _  have erred in the matter. As eemiy noticed, if at all<\/p>\n
 A  ” ptetuesme te establish that the Panchayat had rennet: e<\/p>\n
i.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Bahseer Sab S\/O Dada Saheb vs Isaq Baig S\/O Ahmed Baig on 19 June, 2008 Author: A.S.Bopanna ,< 1 IN THE HIGH COURT 0;: KARNATAKA, BANGAL0_RE "'L–\u00ab.VT: DATED THIS THE 1911* DAY 09 JUNE if " ' BEFORE THE HOIWBLE MR. JUSTICE"- A B-\u00a7;)PANNA ' REGULAR SECOND APPEM, BETWEEN: BASHEER SAB 3\/0 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-48583","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nBahseer Sab S\/O Dada Saheb vs Isaq Baig S\/O Ahmed Baig on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bahseer Sab S\/O Dada Saheb vs Isaq Baig S\/O Ahmed Baig on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-09-07T00:06:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bahseer Sab S\/O Dada Saheb vs Isaq Baig S\/O Ahmed Baig on 19 June, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-09-07T00:06:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1676,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008\",\"name\":\"Bahseer Sab S\/O Dada Saheb vs Isaq Baig S\/O Ahmed Baig on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-09-07T00:06:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bahseer Sab S\/O Dada Saheb vs Isaq Baig S\/O Ahmed Baig on 19 June, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bahseer Sab S\/O Dada Saheb vs Isaq Baig S\/O Ahmed Baig on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bahseer Sab S\/O Dada Saheb vs Isaq Baig S\/O Ahmed Baig on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-09-07T00:06:36+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bahseer Sab S\/O Dada Saheb vs Isaq Baig S\/O Ahmed Baig on 19 June, 2008","datePublished":"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-09-07T00:06:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008"},"wordCount":1676,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008","name":"Bahseer Sab S\/O Dada Saheb vs Isaq Baig S\/O Ahmed Baig on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-09-07T00:06:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bahseer-sab-so-dada-saheb-vs-isaq-baig-so-ahmed-baig-on-19-june-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bahseer Sab S\/O Dada Saheb vs Isaq Baig S\/O Ahmed Baig on 19 June, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48583","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=48583"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48583\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48583"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48583"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48583"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}