* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. Through: 1. For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 61 days in refiling
|
|
- Alberta Victoria Boone
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) No.2711/2015 % 28 th October, 2015 SH. DEEPAK AGGARWAL Through:... Plaintiff Mr. Bhupesh Narula, Advocate. versus SH. RAJ GOYAL AND ORS. Through:... Defendants CORAM: HON BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL) I.A. No.18670/2015 (condonation of delay) 1. For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 61 days in refiling is condoned. I.A. stands disposed of. I.A. No.18669/2015 (exemption) 2. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions. I.A. stands disposed of. I.A No. /2015 (under Order VI Rule 17 CPC) (Be registered) 3. This application is allowed. Amended plaint is taken on record. CS(OS) No.2711/2015 Page 1 of 14
2 + CS(OS) No.2711/2015 and I.A. No.18668/2015 (stay) 4. This suit is coming up today at the admission stage for the fourth time. For the first time the suit came up on and on the second time the suit came up on On these dates it was observed that the suit may have to be dismissed at the stage of admission itself because the requisite ingredients of cause of action of existence of HUF properties were not mentioned in the plaint and therefore the suit would be barred by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, The Orders dated and read as under:- Order dated CS(OS) 2711/2015, I.A. Nos.18669/2015 (Exemption), 18670/2015 (Condonation of delay in re-filing) & 18668/2015 (Stay) 1. No one appeared for plaintiff in the first call. No one appears for the plaintiff even in the second call. It is noticed that in this suit which is for partition, the averments which are made with respect to a HUF, are not sufficient in law to make a complete cause of action of existence of HUF and its properties for the plaintiff to seek reliefs of partition, rendition of accounts etc. In fact the suit, consequently, will be barred by The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, Since no one appears for the plaintiff, in the interest of justice this suit is re-notified, however, if no one appears on the next date of hearing appropriate orders will be passed. 3. List on 1 st October, Order dated A plaint has to have clear cut averments as to on which cause of action plaintiff claims ownership rights and hence partition of a suit property. Firstly, the prayer clause states that the properties stated in the CS(OS) No.2711/2015 Page 2 of 14
3 plaint be partitioned without stating what are the properties of which partition is sought in terms of the prayer clause and the plaint contains quite a few properties, and that too in different names. The plaint is also totally vague as to how plaintiff is claiming to be the owner as to whether the properties have devolved upon the plaintiff and which properties were owned by the predecessor of the plaintiff or if properties are HUF properties then how the properties are HUF properties and how and when the HUF came into existence. 2. In law, there have to be clear cut channels and chapters of causes of action with respect to the reliefs claimed, and which are conspicuous by their absence in the present plaint. 3. I have already adjourned the matter on when none was present for the plaintiff and which order also notes that the suit may possibly be barred by The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, Counsel for the plaintiff states that he will take steps to amend the plaint and which plaint must necessarily specify exactly and in which manner qua which property rights arise in favour of the plaintiff with details as to how and when such rights arose. 4. List on 20 th October, It is made clear that in case necessary steps are not taken before the next date of hearing, appropriate orders will be passed in the suit on the next date of hearing. 5. As per the amended plaint filed, plaintiff seeks the relief of partition for a total of 16 immovable properties which are contained at serial nos.1(1) to 1(7), 1(9), 1(11) to 1(16), 1(18) and 1(19) of the prayer clauses of the plaint. Properties at serial nos.1(8) & 1(17) are shares and bonds, serial nos.1 (10) & 1(20) pertains to sale proceeds of immovable properties already disposed of and the property at serial no.1(21) is of family jewellery. These 21 properties, CS(OS) No.2711/2015 Page 3 of 14
4 16 of which are immovable properties of which partition is sought, as stated in the prayer clause are as under:- S. NO. PARTICULARS OF PROPERTY SHARE OF PLAINTIFF 1. Flat No , New Anaj Mandi, Filmistan, Delhi 2. H. No.4522, Jai Mata Market, Tri Nagar, Delhi- 35 (136 sq. yards) having plot number 73 out of khasra no.165 Village Chowkri Mubarkabad, Delhi, abadi known as ram nagar, Tri Nagar Delhi H. No.2790 Onkar Nagar, Tri Nagar, Delhi-35 (100 sq. yards) earlier plot No.4 out of Khasra No.627/170, Village Chowkri Mubarkabad, Delhi, colony known as Onkar Nagar, Tri Nagar, Delhi. 4. Flat No , New Anaj Mandi, Filmistan, Delhi-6 5. H. No.3359, Jai Mata Market, Tri Nagar, Delhi (100 sq. yards) Harsh Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi-34 (200 sq yds) 7. C-402, Karan Vihar, Part-III, forming part of plot No.5 Khasra no.525, Suleman Nagar, Kirari, Delhi-86. One by sixteen One by sixteen One by sixteen One by forty eight One by sixteen 8. Shares and bonds of around Rs.5 lakhs 9. Shop No.8288/1, New Anaj Mandi, Filmistan, Delhi Sale proceed of 6 lacs of tenancy right 8399, New Anaj Mandi Bara Hindu Rao Filmistan CS(OS) No.2711/2015 Page 4 of 14
5 Delhi and 11 machinery and goodwill 11. B-371, Hari Enclave, Part-II, out of Khasra no.525, Kirari, Suleman Nagar, Delhi admeasuring about 110 sq. yds. (Plot no.16, Khasra no.525, Kirari, Ex-2, Delhi). 12. Plot no.c-415, Karan Vihar, Part-III, out of plot no.233, khasra no.534, Kirari, Suleman Nagar, Delhi admeasuring about 110 sq. yds. 13. Plot no.17 out of khasra No.528, Kirari, Suleman Nagar, Ex-2, Delhi admeasuring about 200 sq yds. 14. Plot no.32 out of Khasra No.526, Kirari, Suleman Nagar, Delhi admeasuring about 200 sq yds. 15. Plot no.c-21, Khasra no.45, Budh Vihar, Phase- II, Delhi admeasuring about 200 sq. yds. 16. Plot no.o-1/33, Khasra no.83, Budh Vihar, Phase-I, Delhi admeasuring about 100 sq. yds. present market value of the property is about Rs.75 lakhs 17. Shares and bonds of about 10 lakhs 18. Plot No.B-388, Hari Enclave, Part-II Out of Khasra No.525, Kirari Suleman Nagar, Delhi-86 (200 sq. yards). 19. One plot out of Khasra No.528, Kirari Suleman Nagar, Delhi-86 (200 Sq. yards). 20. Sale proceeds of two plots bearing number G- 27/ , Sector-3, Rohini, Delhi for around 49 lakhs, and another plot no.246 out of khasra no.159 at Sheeshmahal Enclave, Kirari admeasuring 250 sq. yds. for around 68 lakhs One by sixteen One by sixteen 21. Family jewellery valuing about Rs.1 crore CS(OS) No.2711/2015 Page 5 of 14
6 6. So far as the immovable properties falling between serial nos.1(11) to 1(16) are concerned, they are admittedly purchased, as per averments made in the plaint, by means of title documents in the name of defendant no.2/smt. Shakuntala Devi and who is the mother of the plaintiff. Once title documents exist in favour of a particular person i.e Smt. Shakuntala Devi/defendant no.2, it is Smt. Shakuntala Devi who would be the owner of such properties unless it is averred in the plaint as to how an HUF existed or was created. However, there are no averments in the plaint as to how an HUF existed or was created, and which aspect in detail is dealt with hereinbelow. 7. As per the facts of the present case, grandfather of the plaintiff is Sh. Tulsi Ram, and who admittedly died on i.e after passing of the Hindu Succession Act, It is now settled law that if a person dies after passing of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and properties owned by the deceased are inherited by his male successors-in-interest, then, the male successors-in-interest take the properties as self-acquired properties and not as HUF properties. The only exception to this position is that an HUF being created for the first time after 1956 by throwing property or properties in common hotchpotch. This is the law in view of the ratio laid down in the CS(OS) No.2711/2015 Page 6 of 14
7 two judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Kanpur and Others Vs. Chander Sen and Others, (1986) 3 SCC 567 and Yudhishter Vs. Ashok Kumar, (1987) 1 SCC 204. The relevant para of the judgment in the case of Yudhishter (supra) reads as under:- 10. This question has been considered by this Court in Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Kanpur and Ors. v. Chander Sen and Ors. MANU/SC/0265/1986MANU/SC/0265/1986 : [1986]161ITR370(SC) where one of us (Sabyasachi Mukharji, J) observed that under the Hindu Law, the moment a son is born, he gets a share in father's property and become part of the coparcenary. His right accrues to him not on the death of the father or inheritance from the father but with the very fact of his birth. Normally, therefore whenever the father gets a property from whatever source, from the grandfather or from any other source, be it separated property or not, his son should have a share in that and it will become part of the joint Hindu family of his son and grandson and other members who form joint Hindu family with him. This Court observed that this position has been affected by Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and, therefore, after the Act, when the son inherited the property in the situation contemplated by Section 8, he does not take it as Kar of his own undivided family but takes it in his individual capacity. At pages 577 to 578 of the report, this Court dealt with the effect of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and the commentary made by Mulla, 15th Edn. pages as well as Mayne's on Hindu Law 12th Edition pages Shri Banerji relied on the said observations of Mayne on 'Hindu Law', 12th Edn. at pages This Court observed in the aforesaid decision that the views expressed by the Allahabad High Court, the Madras High Court the Madhya Pradesh High Court and the Andhra Pradesh High Court appeared to be correct and was unable to accept the views of the Gujarat High Court. To the similar effect is the observation of learned author of Mayne's Hindu Law, 12th Edn. page 919. In that view of the matter, it would be difficult to hold that property which developed on a Hindu under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 would be HUF in his hand vis-a-vis his own sons. If that be the position then the property which developed upon the father CS(OS) No.2711/2015 Page 7 of 14
8 of the respondent in the instant case on the demise of his grandfather could not be said to be HUF property. If that is so, then the appellate authority was right in holding that the respondent was a licensee of his father in respect of the ancestral house. 8. Therefore, once the grandfather Sh. Tulsi Ram died on and the father of the plaintiff Sh. Duli Chand died on , inheritance by Sh. Duli Chand of the properties of Sh. Tulsi Ram would be as self-acquired properties by Sh. Duli Chand, and these properties would not be HUF properties in the hands of Sh. Duli Chand for the male successors-in-interest of Sh. Duli Chand to have a right in the same by birth. Plaintiff therefore can claim no rights in the properties of his father Sh. Duli Chand allegedly on the ground of HUF properties once these properties would be self-acquired properties in the hands of Sh. Duli Chand as they have been inherited by Sh. Duli Chand from Sh. Tulsi Ram only in the year 1983 i.e after passing of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and as read with the ratios of the judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Chander Sen and Others(supra) and Yudhishter (supra). 9. Let us now examine the general averments of the plaint as to whether it is stated that Sh. Tulsi Ram or Sh. Duli Chand created an HUF for the first time by throwing properties in common hotchpotch. It is sine qua non upon the plaintiff to aver in the plaint of creation of an HUF by CS(OS) No.2711/2015 Page 8 of 14
9 throwing the properties in common hotchpotch and only on which basis an HUF can come into existence after passing of the Hindu Succession Act in General averments that properties are family properties or that businesses were carried out for the benefit of the family cannot in law result either in averments constituting a cause of action of HUF properties or in creation of an HUF, and which is only created/pleaded to exist on the mentioning of a specific date/month/year when an HUF is created for the first time by throwing the properties in common hotchpotch. The plaint is conspicuously silent as regards any averments of either Sh. Tulsi Ram or Sh. Duli Chand creating an HUF after the year 1956 by throwing the properties into common hotchpotch. The only averment is that businesses were carried on for the benefit of the family members and properties were purchased for the benefit of family members and which averments in law do not create or show a cause of action existing of an HUF being created by throwing the properties in common hotchpotch. Also, there are no averments in the plaint as to the properties being shown as HUF properties either in the house tax record or in income tax record or any other public record whatsoever. 10. In view of the above, so far as the properties which are purchased by means of title papers in the name of defendant no.2 or the CS(OS) No.2711/2015 Page 9 of 14
10 defendant no.2 jointly with Sh. Brijesh Garg/defendant no.14 or any other defendant are concerned, these properties would be the properties of these persons and plaintiff cannot claim any rights to these properties. The suit seeking partition and possession of these immoveable properties is therefore dismissed. 11. The aforesaid discussion will cover immovable properties falling within serial nos.1(4) to 1(7), 1(9), 1(11) to 1(16) and 1(18) and 1(19) of the prayer clause in the plaint. Properties nos.1(11) to 1(16) are of the mother/defendant no.2 and in whose name the title papers exist as per the averments in the plaint and the two properties being at serial nos.1(18) and 1(19) of the prayer clause in the plaint are owned by the defendant nos.2 and 14 and in whose name the property papers exist as per the plaint. Accordingly, the suit seeking the relief of partition of these properties is dismissed as plaintiff does not have any right to these properties inasmuch as no HUF is shown to exist. 12. That takes us to the properties which were purchased by the father Sh. Duli Chand jointly with the defendant no.8/sh. Kanwar Sain and which properties are at serial nos.1(1) to 1(3) of the prayer clause in the plaint. The discussion given above with respect to non-existence of an HUF CS(OS) No.2711/2015 Page 10 of 14
11 will also similarly apply so far as these properties not being HUF properties are concerned and therefore the relief seeking partition of these properties on the ground that these properties are HUF properties would stand rejected and the suit dismissed. 13. The only other way in which plaintiff could have claimed a share to the properties which were owned jointly by his father Sh. Duli Chand with any other person was if Sh. Duli Chand had died intestate i.e without leaving behind a Will. Admittedly, the father Sh. Duli Chand expired long back on and there is no whisper/averment in the plaint that the father Sh. Duli Chand died intestate without leaving behind any Will. Though counsel for the plaintiff today on the fourth date of admission states that actually some other suit is filed by defendant no.2 in which it is stated by the defendant no.2 that her husband and the father of plaintiff died intestate, but so far as averments in this plaint with respect to the plaintiff being an owner on account of the father having died intestate and hence plaintiff having a share are concerned, the same are conspicuous by their absence and therefore the plaint does not disclose a cause of action of the entitlement of the plaintiff to claim a share in the properties owned by the father and the plaint so far as these three properties are concerned is thus CS(OS) No.2711/2015 Page 11 of 14
12 rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for lacking in averments with respect to a cause of action of the plaintiff having ownership of these properties by inheritance. Plaintiff, of course, will have liberty in accordance with law for filing a fresh suit with respect to these properties because rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC will not prevent the plaintiff from filing a fresh suit as Order VII Rule 13 CPC allows filing of a fresh suit on a proper cause of action being averred. 14. The discussion given above with respect to the properties jointly in the name of Sh. Duli Chand and defendant no.8/sh. Kanwar Sain will equally apply to the properties which are standing in the name of the grandmother Smt. Parvati Devi (who has since expired on ) and Sh. Anil Aggarwal/defendant no.10. Also, Smt. Parvati Devi being the grandmother of the plaintiff, therefore on her death the properties of Smt. Parvati Devi will be inherited by Sh. Duli Chand as self-acquired properties and therefore plaintiff would not in any case have a right to any properties owned by Sh. Duli Chand as inherited by him from his mother Smt. Parvati Devi, unless of course it is found that Sh. Duli Chand died without leaving behind any Will and with respect to which aspect liberty has also been given CS(OS) No.2711/2015 Page 12 of 14
13 as stated above to the plaintiff to file an appropriate suit for seeking rights to the suit properties owned by the father of the plaintiff Sh. Duli Chand if Sh. Duli Chand has died without leaving behind any Will. I may note that the same reasoning will also apply with respect to property no.3359, Jai Mata Market, Tri Nagar, Delhi which is said to have been purchased in the name of Sh. Duli Chand and Smt. Saroj Bala/defendant no The reliefs with respect to any other movable properties which were owned by Sh. Duli Chand and to which if plaintiff has a right, as stated above, the plaintiff will have to file an appropriate suit making the requisite averments constituting the cause of action for seeking share in the properties of the father Sh. Duli Chand. 16. In view of the above, the suit is dismissed so far as the cause of action seeking partition on the ground that the properties are family properties is concerned, inasmuch as there is no concept of family properties and an HUF does not exist as required by law for the plaintiff to claim a right in the properties on the ground that these properties are HUF properties. So far as the properties which are said to have been owned by the father Sh. Duli Chand are concerned, the plaintiff on making averments with respect to a complete cause of CS(OS) No.2711/2015 Page 13 of 14
14 action, the plaintiff will be entitled in accordance with law to file a fresh suit. Suit is dismissed and disposed of in terms of the aforesaid observations. OCTOBER 28, 2015 Ne VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J CS(OS) No.2711/2015 Page 14 of 14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS (OS) No.1737/2012 % 18 th January, versus
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS (OS) No.1737/2012 % 18 th January, 2016 SH. SURENDER KUMAR... Plaintiff Through Mr. Manoranjan and Mr.Kailash Sharma, Advocates versus SH. DHANI RAM AND OTHERS
More informationVersus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA O R D E R %
$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 941/2010 and I.A. No.10774/2014 (under Section 151 CPC by plaintiff) SUSHMA JAIN Through: None.... Plaintiff Versus SITAL DASS JAIN & OTHERS Through:...
More informationThrough: Mr. Rajiv K. Garg, Advocate with Mr. Ashish Garg, Advocate
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE I.A. No.18548/2011 (by defendants No.11 and 12 u/o VII R 11 CPC in CS(OS) No. 818/2011 Reserved on: 30.08.2012 Date of decision:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DECLARATION. RFA Nos. 601/2007 and 606/2007. DATE OF DECISION 10th February, 2012.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DECLARATION RFA Nos. 601/2007 and 606/2007 DATE OF DECISION 10th February, 2012 1. RFA 601/2007 SHER SINGH Through: Mr. Avadh Kaushik, Advocate....
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) No.1528/2010 % 18 th January, 2016 SH. SURENDER KUMAR KHURANA... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Sudhir Sukhija, Advocate versus SH. TILAK RAJ KHURANA & ORS....Defendants
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. RFA No.200/2003. Reserved on 14th February, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RFA No.200/2003 Reserved on 14th February, 2012 Pronounced on 2nd March, 2012 SHRI VED PRAKASH (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS...
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION. Judgment pronounced on: I.A. No.4998/2012 in CS(OS) No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION Judgment pronounced on: 10.04.2012 I.A. No.4998/2012 in CS(OS) No.136/2009 SUGANDHA SETHI...Plaintiff Through: Ms. N.Shoba with Mr.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. RFA No.587/2010. DATE OF DECISION :22nd February, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RFA No.587/2010 DATE OF DECISION :22nd February, 2012 SANTOKH SINGH Through: Mr. Rajat Aneja with Mr. Vaibhav Jairaj, Advs....
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No.595/2003 Reserved on: 4th January, 2012 Pronounced on: 13th January, 2012 SHRI VIRENDER SINGH Through: Mr. R.C. Chopra,
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Versus
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) No.2798/2011 % 19 th October, 2015 SH. SUSHIL YADAV AND ANR. Through: None.... Plaintiffs Versus M/S VALLEY VIEW DEVELOPERS PVT LTD AND ORS.... Defendants
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : DELHI LAND REFORMS ACT, 1954 RSA No. 252/2013 DATE OF DECISION : 15th January,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : DELHI LAND REFORMS ACT, 1954 RSA No. 252/2013 DATE OF DECISION : 15th January, 2014 SURESH BALA & ORS Through: Mr. B.S.Mann, Advocate....Appellants VERSUS
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. RFA No. 581/2003. DATE OF DECISION : 13th March, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RFA No. 581/2003 DATE OF DECISION : 13th March, 2012 M/S B.R.METAL CORPN. & ORS. Appellants Through : Mr. A.K. Singla, Sr. Advocate
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. RFA No.137/2011. DATE OF DECISION : 4th March, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RFA No.137/2011 DATE OF DECISION : 4th March, 2011 NARESH KUMAR SAINI Through: Appellant Mr. S.P.Jha, Adv. VERSUS DAYA RANI DIXIT
More information* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + IA No.10977/2007 & CS (OS) No.1418/2007. Date of decision : 18 th August, 2009
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + IA No.10977/2007 & CS (OS) No.1418/2007 Date of decision : 18 th August, 2009 SMT. JAI LAKSHMI SHARMA... PLAINTIFF Through : Mr. H.S. Gautam, Advocate Versus SMT. DROPATI
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + CS(OS) No. 684/2004 % 8 th December, versus
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) No. 684/2004 % 8 th December, 2015 RAJESH @ RAJ CHAUDHARY AND ORS.... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Manish Vashisth and Ms. Trisha Nagpal, Advocates. versus
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. MICROSOFT CORPORATION & ANR. Through: Ms. Safia Said, Advocate. versus. Through:
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) No.70/2015 % 23 rd December, 2015 MICROSOFT CORPORATION & ANR.... Plaintiffs Through: Ms. Safia Said, Advocate. versus MR. SUJAN KUMAR & ORS. Through:...Defendants
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment pronounced on: I.A. No.13124/2011 in CS (OS) No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment pronounced on: 07.03.2012 I.A. No.13124/2011 in CS (OS) No.1674/2011 SURENDRA KUMAR GUPTA Through Mr. J.S. Mann, Adv....
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL SIDE JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.738 OF 2014 IN SUIT NO.
jsn 1 NMS No.738_2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL SIDE JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.738 OF 2014 IN SUIT NO.454 OF 2014 Paresh Damodardas Mahant Plaintiff Vs. Arun Damodardas
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment delivered on: CS(OS) 2248/2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment delivered on: 25.07.2012 CS(OS) 2248/2011 MAHESH CHANDER MALIK... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Anshuj Dhingra and Mr. Anubhav
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + FAO No. 257/2017. % 6 th July, versus. HINDUSTAN MEDIA VENTRUES LTD. & ORS...
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + FAO No. 257/2017 % 6 th July, 2017 DEEPAK KUMAR @ DEEPAK SAHA... Appellant Through: Mr. Nakul Pathana and Mr. Akhand Pratap, Advocates. versus HINDUSTAN MEDIA
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, 1925 FAO 562/2003 DATE OF DECISION : 7th July, 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, 1925 FAO 562/2003 DATE OF DECISION : 7th July, 2014 SMT. DARSHAN Through: Mr. Israel Ali, Advocate....Appellants VERSUS SHRI RAJ
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DECLARATION RSA No. 80/2009 DATE OF DECISION : 20th January, 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DECLARATION RSA No. 80/2009 DATE OF DECISION : 20th January, 2014 PUSHPA RANI & ORS. Through: Mr. Subhash Chand, Advocate...Appellants. VERSUS
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No.365 /2008 DATE OF DECISION : 10th February, 2012 VERSUS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No.365 /2008 DATE OF DECISION : 10th February, 2012 SHRI VIJAY KUMAR Through: Appellant in person.... Appellant VERSUS
More information$~J *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + IA 16973/2013 in CC 50/2013 in CS(OS) 626/2012. versus
$~J *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + IA 16973/2013 in CC 50/2013 in CS(OS) 626/2012 Date of Reserve: April 07, 2015 Date of Decision:July 31, 2015 JASBIR SINGH LAMBA & ORS... Plaintiffs Through
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RSA No.64/2011 DATE OF DECISION : 31st January, 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RSA No.64/2011 DATE OF DECISION : 31st January, 2014 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI Through: Ms. Shobha Gupta, Advocate....Appellant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No.51/2012 DATE OF DECISION : 17th May, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No.51/2012 DATE OF DECISION : 17th May, 2012 MS. KRITI KOHLI Through: Mr. Rao Balvir Singh, Advocate... Appellant VERSUS
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION CS(OS) No.774/2001 DATE OF DECISION : 22nd November, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION CS(OS) No.774/2001 DATE OF DECISION : 22nd November, 2012 SHRI RAMESH CHAND AGGARWAL & ORS.... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Sanjay
More information$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1738/2013 Judgment reserved on 10 th September, 2015 Judgment delivered on 23 rd September, 2015 HARISH CHAND TANDON Through:... Plaintiff Ms. Shalini
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) No. 576/2006 % 16 th September, 2015 CHATTAR SINGH MATHAROO Through:... Plaintiff Mr. J.M.Kalia, Advocate. versus ASHWANI MUDGIL & ORS. Through:... Defendants
More informationThrough: Mr. Rahul Kumar Srivastava, Advocate. C.M(M) No. 211/2013. Through: Mr. Rahul Kumar Srivastava, Advocate.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CM(M) Nos. 208/2013 & 211/2013 DATE OF DECISION : 4th December, 2014 C.M(M) No. 208/2013 SUDARSHAN KUMAR JAIN Through: Mr. Rahul
More information1. This application has been filed by the defendant under Order VI Rule 17 CPC praying inter alia for permission to amend the written statement.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE I.A. No.8998/2012 (by the defendant u/o VI R 17 CPC) in CS(OS) No. 1342/2011 Reserved on: 27.08.2012 Date of decision: 10.01.2013
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + RFA No.522/2017 and C.M. No.19306/2017(stay) % 7th August, versus
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA No.522/2017 and C.M. No.19306/2017(stay) % 7th August, 2018 MANOJ ARORA... Appellant Through: Mr. M. Sufian Siddiqui, Advocate with Mr. Rakesh Bhugra, Advocate
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CM(M) No.887/2014 DATE OF DECISION : 25th September, 2014 VERSUS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CM(M) No.887/2014 DATE OF DECISION : 25th September, 2014 SMT. SALONI MAHAJAN Through: Mr. Puneet Saini, Advocate....Petitioner
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + Date of Decision: % RSA 417/2015 & C.M. Nos /2015. versus.
$~26. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision: 04.12.2015 % RSA 417/2015 & C.M. Nos.29313-14/2015 SHIV KUMAR... Appellant Through: Mr. Anil Sehgal, Mr. Om Prakash and Mr. Lalit Kumar
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DECLARATION. CM(M) No. 932/2007 and CM(M) No. 938/2007 RESERVED ON: 4.12.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DECLARATION CM(M) No. 932/2007 and CM(M) No. 938/2007 RESERVED ON: 4.12.2007 DATE OF DECISION: 7.12.2007 Arti Arora... Through: Petitioner Mr.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION. Date of Reserve: 5th July, Date of judgment: November 06, 2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION Date of Reserve: 5th July, 2007 Date of judgment: November 06, 2007 CS(OS) No.1440/2000 Mela Ram... Through: Plaintiff Ms.Sonia Khurana
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2005 J U D G M E N T
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5514 OF 2005 Ganeshi (D) through LRs & Ors... Appellants -versus- Ashok & Anr... Respondents J U D G M E N T Markandey
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS OF 2011 VERSUS AVM MAHINDER SINGH RAO...RESPONDENTS AND OTHERS
1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 6918-6919 OF 2011 NARINDER SINGH RAO...APPELLANT VERSUS AVM MAHINDER SINGH RAO...RESPONDENTS AND OTHERS J U
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : BENAMI TRANSACTION (PROHIBITION) ACT, 1988 Date of decision: 6th December, 2013.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : BENAMI TRANSACTION (PROHIBITION) ACT, 1988 Date of decision: 6th December, 2013. RFA 439/2008 SUDHIR KHANNA Through: Mr. S.C. Singhal, Adv.... Appellant
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + CS(COMM) No.1564/2016. % 24 th November, 2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) No.1564/2016 % 24 th November, 2017 BAJAJ RESOURCES LIMITED & ANR.... Plaintiffs Through Mr. J. Sai Deepak, Mr. Piyush Kumar and Mr. Vardaan Anand,
More information$~9. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % RSA 228/2015 and C.M. No.12883/2015. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
$~9. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision: 03.09.2015 % RSA 228/2015 and C.M. No.12883/2015 SHRI BABU LAL Through: Mr. V. Shukla, Advocate.... Appellant versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % 21 st January, versus. Through: CORAM: HON BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA No. 1010/2018 % 21 st January, 2019 ROHTAS SINGH THROUGH LS.... Appellant Through: Mr. Mohd. Azam Ansari, Advocate (M. No.9990066404). versus UNION OF INDIA
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % 1 st October, MRS. VANEETA KHANNA AND ANR. Through: Mr. Sandeep Mittal, Advocate.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) No.1200/2006 % 1 st October, 2015 MRS. VANEETA KHANNA AND ANR.... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Sandeep Mittal, Advocate. Versus MR. RAJIV GUPTA AND ORS. Through:...
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 C.R.P. 589/1998. Date of Decision: 6th March, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 C.R.P. 589/1998 Date of Decision: 6th March, 2009 SURINDER KAUR Through: Petitioner Ms. Nandni Sahni, Advocate. versus SARDAR
More information* HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI. Judgment delivered on: 22 nd January, 2010
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI FAO. No.42/2008 & CM No. 1368/08 % Judgment reserved on: 10 th November, 2009 1. S. Gurbaksh Singh S/o. S. Tej Singh B-45, Greater Kailash I New Delhi 110048 2. S. Baljit
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: 4 th August, I.A. No.16571/2012 & I.A. No.16572/2012 in CS (OS) 2527/2009
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 4 th August, 2015 + I.A. No.16571/2012 & I.A. No.16572/2012 in CS (OS) 2527/2009 VEENA KUMARI Through... Plaintiff Mr.D.S. Vohra, Adv.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2011 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8538 OF 2011 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 9586 of 2010) Ganduri Koteshwaramma & Anr.. Appellants Versus Chakiri
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + CCP(O) No. 120/2005 in OMP No. 342/2004. NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY INDIA (NHAI)... Petitioner.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CCP(O) No. 120/2005 in OMP No. 342/2004 % 4 th November, 2015 NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY INDIA (NHAI)... Petitioner Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Ms. Suchite and
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ACT, 1987 FAO No. 332/2013 DATE OF DECISION : 16th January, 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ACT, 1987 FAO No. 332/2013 DATE OF DECISION : 16th January, 2014 RAJ KUMARI DEVI & ORS. Through: Mr. Rajnish K. Jha, Advocate....
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + CS(COMM) Nos.421/2016 & 424/2016. % 28 th November, M/s VYSYA LEASING & FINANCE LTD.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) Nos.421/2016 & 424/2016 % 28 th November, 2017 1. CS(COMM) No.421/2016 M/S VYSYA LEASING & FINANCE LTD.... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Vidit Gupta, Advocate
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Date of Judgment: RSA No.53/2011 & CM. Nos /2011. Versus
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : BENAMI TRANSACTIONS (PROHIBITION) ACT, 1988 Date of Judgment: 22.03.2011 RSA No.53/2011 & CM. Nos. 5887-88/2011 MANOJ GUPTA Through: Mr.P.N.Dham, Advocate...Appellant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : DELHI LAND REFORMS ACT, 1954 RFA No.621/2003 DATE OF DECISION : 5th March, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : DELHI LAND REFORMS ACT, 1954 RFA No.621/2003 DATE OF DECISION : 5th March, 2012 ASHOK KUMAR & ORS.... Appellant Through: Mr. R.K. Anand, Advocate with
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. RFA No.95/2010. DATE OF DECISION : 17th January, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RFA No.95/2010 DATE OF DECISION : 17th January, 2012 SANT RAM MANGAT RAM JEWELLERS Through: Ms. Sumita Kapil, Advocate.... Appellant
More information#1 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus. MR RAJBIR ORS... Defendant Through: Ex Parte
#1 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 222/2016 TATA SONS LIMITED Through:... Plaintiff Ms. Geetanjali Visvanathan with Ms. Asavari Jain, Advocates versus MR RAJBIR JINDAL @ ORS...
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DISSOLUTION OF PARTNERSHIP. Judgment delivered on:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DISSOLUTION OF PARTNERSHIP Judgment delivered on: 10.04.2012 I.A. No.7642/2011 in CS(OS) 2002/2010 MANJEET SINGH... Plaintiff Through Mr. Vikram
More information$~J *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Versus
$~J *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 1008/2013 KRISHAN LAL ARORA Through: Versus Date of Pronouncement: August 14, 2015... Plaintiff Dr. N. K. Khetarpal, Adv. GURBACHAN SINGH AND ORS...
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA 689/1998 DATE OF DECISION : MAY 16, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA 689/1998 DATE OF DECISION : MAY 16, 2012 NAR SINGH DASS GUPTA... Appellant Through: Mr. Ashwini Mata, Sr. Adv. with Mr.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION Judgment delivered on: CS(OS) 2318/2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION Judgment delivered on: 14.08.2012 CS(OS) 2318/2006 MR. CHETAN DAYAL Through: Ms Yashmeet Kaur, Adv.... Plaintiff versus MRS. ARUNA MALHOTRA
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + CS(COMM) Nos.53/2015 & 54/ CS(COMM) No. 53/2015 and I.A. No.25929/2015 (stay)
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) Nos.53/2015 & 54/2015 % 21 st December, 2015 1. CS(COMM) No. 53/2015 and I.A. No.25929/2015 (stay) BIGTREE ENTERTAINMENT PVT. LTD.... Plaintiff Through:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT RFA No.358/2000 DATE OF DECISION : 9th April, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT RFA No.358/2000 DATE OF DECISION : 9th April, 2012 SHRI RAMESH CHAND... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajesh Aggarwal, Advocate with
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. RESERVED ON : March 20, DATE OF DECISION : April 2, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR POSSESSION RESERVED ON : March 20, 2008 DATE OF DECISION : April 2, 2008 LPA No. 665/2003 and CM Nos.4204/2004 and 6054/2007 JAGMAL (DECEASED)
More information- versus - 1. The following reliefs have been claimed in this
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION Judgment Reserved on: 01.03.2011 Judgment Pronounced on: 18.03.2011 I.A. No. 14803/2010 in CS(OS) No. 1943/1998 Sita Kashyap & Anothers..
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. IPA No.15/2005. Date of decision : November 20, Vs.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IPA No.15/2005 Date of decision : November 20, 2007 Sarbjyot Kaur Saluja and Ors Through: Ms.Geeta Luthra, Advocate.... Plaintiffs
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR POSSESSION. Judgment Reserved on: Judgment Pronounced on:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR POSSESSION Judgment Reserved on: 31.03.2011 Judgment Pronounced on: 06.04.2011 IA No. 4427/2011 in CS(OS) No. 669/2011 TANU GOEL & ANR... Plaintiff
More information$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :1 st February, 2018 Date of decision :15 th May, RFA 301/2017
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on :1 st February, 2018 Date of decision :15 th May, 2018 + RFA 301/2017 VINEETA SHARMA... Appellant RAKESH SHARMA & ORS. Through: CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU B E F O R E THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO OF 2014 (GM-CPC)
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2015 B E F O R E THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO.38461 OF 2014 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT
More informationDELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR... Defendants Through: Mr. Pawan Mathur, Advocate. CS(OS) 1442/2004 & I.A.7528/2013 (of defendant u/o 7 R-11 CPC)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 Date of decision: 1st July, 2014 CS(OS) 1441/2004 & I.A.7527/2013 (of defendant u/o 7 R-11 CPC) SAMANIT ENTERPRISES & ANR Through:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL. R.S.A.No.2061/2012
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE BETWEEN: DATED THIS THE 11 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2013 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL R.S.A.No.2061/2012 1. M.M.Thammayya S/o late M.M.Muthanna Aged about
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL Nos OF 2019 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Nos OF 2015
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos.1269-1270 OF 2019 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Nos. 21402-21403 OF 2015 PYARELAL... APPELLANT Versus SHUBHENDRA
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IA No.13139/2011 in CS(OS) 1163/2011 Date of Decision : July 05, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IA No.13139/2011 in CS(OS) 1163/2011 Date of Decision : July 05, 2012 SHAMBHU DUTT DOGRA Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Advocate....
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. RFA No.458/2008. Date of decision: 3rd December, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RFA No.458/2008 Date of decision: 3rd December, 2008 MUKESH KUMAR DECD. THR. LR'S and ANR.... Appellants Through: Mr.K.G.Chhokar,
More informationJ U D G M E N T WITH C.A. No. 4455/2005 HARJIT SINGH BEDI,J.
Supreme Court of India Makhan Singh (D) By Lrs vs Kulwant Singh on 30 March, 2007 Author: H S Bedi Bench: B.P. Singh, Harjit Singh Bedi CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 4446 of 2005 PETITIONER: Makhan Singh (D)
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RC. REV. No.75/2014 DATE OF DECISION : 25th September, 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RC. REV. No.75/2014 DATE OF DECISION : 25th September, 2014 SMT. JAI SHREE LALLA Through: Mr. S.K. Singh, Advocate....Petitioner
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: RSA No.46/2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Date of Judgment: 10.3.2011 RSA No.46/2011 VIRENDER KUMAR & ANR. Through: Mr.Atul Kumar, Advocate...Appellants Versus JASWANT RAI
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. Dated of Reserve: July 21, Date of Order : September 05, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Dated of Reserve: July 21, 2008 Date of Order : September 05, 2008 CM(M) No.819/2007 Rajiv Sud...Petitioner Through: Mr. Ravi Gupta
More information$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 15 th February, CS(OS) 3324/2014
$~28 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 15 th February, 2019. + CS(OS) 3324/2014 DEEPA BHURE & ORS... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Hemant Mehla, Advocate (9810270050) and petitioner
More information* HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI. 1. Sh. Hari Prakash Sharma (deceased) S/o Late Shri Kehar Singh Sharma, Through Legal Heirs.
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI CM (M) Nos. 1201/2010 & CM No. 16773/2010 % Judgment reserved on: 17 th September, 2010 Judgment delivered on: 09 th November, 2010 1. Sh. Hari Prakash Sharma (deceased)
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR INJUNCTION CS(OS) 1177/2007 Date of Decision : July 06, versus
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR INJUNCTION CS(OS) 1177/2007 Date of Decision : July 06, 2012 NANAK CHAND & ORS. Through: Mr.Vinay Kumar Garg & Mr. Fazal Ahmad, Advocates... Plaintiffs
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, DATE OF Decision : 18th January, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No. 40/2012 DATE OF Decision : 18th January, 2012 M/S SEWA INTERNATIONAL FASHIONS & ORS... Appellants Through : Md. Rashid,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION CS(OS) 2658/1999. Date of Decision : February 08, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PARTITION CS(OS) 2658/1999 Date of Decision : February 08, 2012 NARINDER NATH SETH & ORS.... Plaintiffs Through: Mr. Gaurav Puri, Mr. Dilip Gupta
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO.3777 OF 2018 [Arising out of SLP (C) No of 2014]
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3777 OF 2018 [Arising out of SLP (C) No.13256 of 2014] Sucha Singh Sodhi (D) Thr. LRs... Appellant(s) Versus Baldev
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + OMP Nos. 495/2007, 496/2007 & 497/2007
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + OMP Nos. 495/2007, 496/2007 & 497/2007 % Reserved on: 7 th January, 2016 Pronounced on: 28 th January, 2016 + O.M.P. No. 495/2007 SHRI DHRUV VARMA... Petitioner
More information*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of decision:11 th December, Through: Mr Rajat Aneja, Advocate. Versus AND. CM (M)No.
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM (M) No.331/2007 % Date of decision:11 th December, 2009 SMT. SAVITRI DEVI. Petitioner Through: Mr Rajat Aneja, Advocate. Versus SMT. GAYATRI DEVI & ORS....
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment reserved on: 24 th April, 2015 Judgment delivered on: 08 th October, 2015
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 24 th April, 2015 Judgment delivered on: 08 th October, 2015 + FAO(OS) 220/2015 & CM Nos.7502/2015, 7504/2015 SERGI TRANSFORMER EXPLOSION
More informationSMT. JUGAN K. MEHTA... APPELLANT Through : Mr. S.P. Kalra, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Kirti K. Mehta, Advocate. - V E R S U S -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Reserved on : 19.01.2012 Date of decision : 30.01.2012 FAO (OS) No. 249 of 2004 SMT. JUGAN K. MEHTA... APPELLANT Through
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 ARB.P. 63/2012 Date of Decision : December 06, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 ARB.P. 63/2012 Date of Decision : December 06, 2012 M/S RURAL COMMUNICATION & MARKETING PVT LTD... Petitioner Through:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. I.A. No /2011 in CS (OS) 1544/2011. Reserved on: 21st November, 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE I.A. No. 16744/2011 in CS (OS) 1544/2011 Reserved on: 21st November, 2013 Decided on: 22nd April, 2014 SMT.VANDANA SHARMA... Plaintiff
More informationPartial and Full Partition of Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) and Income Tax provisions Meaning of Partition: -
Partial and Full Partition of Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) and Income Tax provisions Meaning of Partition: - Partition is the severance of the status of Joint Hindu Family, known as Hindu Undivided Family
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. CS(OS) No.2397/2006 and IA No.7807/07 (S.151 CPC by Def.1and2 ) Date of decision:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE CS(OS) No.2397/2006 and IA No.7807/07 (S.151 CPC by Def.1and2 ) Date of decision: 06.11.2007 SUKHBIR SHOKEN... PLAINTIFF
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. Judgment delivered on: I.A. No.12824/2010 in CS(OS) No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Judgment delivered on: 13.04.2012 I.A. No.12824/2010 in CS(OS) No.799/2010 J.L. Gugnani...Plaintiff Through Mr. Anil K. Kher, Sr.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF Smt. P. Leelavathi (D) by LRs. Versus
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1099 OF 2008 Smt. P. Leelavathi (D) by LRs.. Appellant Versus V. Shankarnarayana Rao (D) by LRs.. Respondent J U
More informationIN THE HON BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ITM SCHOOL OF LAW - MOOT COURT EXERCISE IN THE HON BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IN THE MATTER OF SMT. VIDYA...APPELLANT Vs. NAND RAM ALIAS ASOOP RAM (DEAD) by LRs...RESPONDENT COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT SAKSHI
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY CS(OS) No.1177/2003 DATE OF DECISION :23rd July, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR RECOVERY CS(OS) No.1177/2003 DATE OF DECISION :23rd July, 2012 MRS VEENA JAIN... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Mohan Vidhani, Advocate with Mr. Rahul
More information$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + CS(COMM) 1468/2016 & I.A.No.1532/2017. versus. % Date of Decision: 02 nd November, 2017
$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 1468/2016 & I.A.No.1532/2017 KENT RO SYSTEMS LTD & ANR.... Plaintiffs Through: Ms. Rajeshwari H. with Mr.Kumar Chitranshu, Advocates. versus MR
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. CS(OS)No.1307/2006. Date of decision:16th January, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CS(OS)No.1307/2006 Date of decision:16th January, 2009 SMT. TARAN JEET KAUR... Through: Plaintiff Mr. Rajeev Awasthi, Advocate
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DECLARATION. Date of Judgment: R.S.A.No. 90/2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR DECLARATION Date of Judgment: 28.04.2011 R.S.A.No. 90/2007 SH. NARAIN SINGH & ORS...Appellants Through: Ms. Sukhda Dhamiza, Advocate along with
More informationTHE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Delhi Rent Control Act R.C.REV.29/2012 Date of Decision: Versus
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Delhi Rent Control Act R.C.REV.29/2012 Date of Decision: 17.08.2012 SMT. NARENDER KAUR Through: Mr. Adarsh Ganesh, Adv... Petitioner Versus MAHESH CHAND AND
More informationIN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) CRP NO.6 OF 2017
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH) CRP NO.6 OF 2017 1. SMTI. TETERI DEVI, Wife of Late Mohendra Harizon. 2. SHRI RAMANANDA HARIZON, Son of Late Mohendra
More informationSURAJ BHAN THR GPA HOLDER & ORS... Appellants Through Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Mr. Vardhman Kaushik, Advocates
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 DATE OF DECISION : 7th February, 2014 LA.APP. 632/2011 & CM No. 17689/2013 (for stay) SURAJ BHAN THR GPA HOLDER & ORS.... Appellants
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No.31/2011 DATE OF DECISION : 22nd February, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 RFA No.31/2011 DATE OF DECISION : 22nd February, 2011 SHREE LAKSHMI VENKATESH CARGO MOVERS AND CONSULTANTS... Appellant Through:
More information