Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Harshlata Aggarwal vs Prabhakar Sharma on 6 January, 2023

Author: Tushar Rao Gedela

Bench: Tushar Rao Gedela

                          $~27
                          *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +      CM(M) 311/2021 and CM APP No. 13773/2021
                                 HARSHLATA AGGARWAL                                  ..... Petitioner
                                                      Through:     Mr. M.S. Rohilla, Advocate

                                                      versus

                                 PRABHAKAR SHARMA                                    ..... Respondent
                                                      Through:     Mr. Satya Narayan, Advocate for R-1
                                                                   Mr. Prashant Kumar Mittal, Mr.
                                                                   Sachin Kumar Jain and Mr. Shubham,
                                                                   Advocates for R-2

                                 CORAM:
                                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
                                                      ORDER

% 06.01.2023 [ The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode ]

1. Mr. Rohilla, learned counsel for the Petitioner relies upon the registered codicil, appended at page 44 of the paper book, executed by the late father.

2. As per Mr. Rohilla, the Petitioner is entitled to lease out the property and enjoy the proceeds of rent or user charges accruing from the suit property.

3. Per contra, Mr.Mittal, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.2, who is none other than the brother of the Petitioner, CM(M) 311/2021 page 1 of 2 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VINOD KUMAR Signing Date:12.01.2023 16:19:21 submits that though codicil has been challenged by way of separate proceedings before the Trial Court, yet he submits that even if he reads the codicil, specially para 12, the contents thereof confer the status of landlord upon Respondent No.2 and except with the permission of Respondent No.2, the Petitioner could not and cannot give out the property by way of sale, alienate, mortgage, exchange or even lease out the said property.

4. In that view of the matter, Mr. Mittal says that learned Trial Court by way of the impugned order has correctly impleaded Respondent No.2 as necessary party to the suit proceedings.

5. After some arguments, learned counsel for the parties seek time to file judgments that they seek to rely upon in support of their contentions.

6. Let the needful be done within two weeks from today.

7. List for consideration on 21.02.2023 in the first 15 matters.

8. The Trial Court proceedings be continue without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the Petitioner raised in the present petition.


                                                                   TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J
                          JANUARY 6, 2023
                          yg

                          CM(M) 311/2021                                              page 2 of 2




Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:VINOD KUMAR
Signing Date:12.01.2023
16:19:21