Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 44 (0.66 seconds)
Documents citing Surjit Kaur vs Naurata Singh & Anr on 13 September, 2000

Avtar Singh vs Gulzar Singh & Ors on 2 September, 2009

The impugned order passed by the learned trial court cannot be sustained. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Surjit Kaur Vs. Naurata Singh (supra) was not dealing with a plea of amendment of plaint to relinquish the claim. Learned trial court also failed to notice that in spite of stand taken by the plaintiff/petitioner in their evidence the suit against defendants No.1 and 2 was in fact decreed.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Jumbo World Holdings Limited vs Embassy Property Developments Private ... on 10 January, 2020

5. The learned senior counsel relied heavily on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Surjit Kaur v. Naurata Singh (2000) 7 SCC 379 (Surjit Kaur), which was effectively the sheet anchor of his contentions. The said judgment dealt with an agreement to sell immovable property by execution of the sale deed by the appellant on 30 June 1981. The agreement, in that case, further provided that the appellant would get her name mutated in the record of rights and also give possession of the land to the first respondent. A civil suit was filed by the second respondent against the appellant and the first respondent claiming ownership of the land and an interim order was obtained in the said suit preventing alienation of the land by the appellant. In the circumstances, the appellant stated that she was not in a position to deliver possession as agreed to in the agreement for sale. On these facts, the Supreme Court concluded that the appellant was ready and willing to execute the sale deed but the first respondent was not willing to accept the transaction unless all the conditions, including transfer of mutation in favour of the appellant and delivery of possession also took place. In effect, the Supreme Court concluded that the first respondent elected not http://www.judis.nic.in 6 of 27 O.P.No.891 of 2015 to accept part performance of the agreement to sell. After noting the above factual position, in paragraph 13, the Supreme Court concluded as under:
Madras High Court Cites 22 - Cited by 7 - S Ramamoorthy - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 Next