Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.44 seconds)

)Smt. Santosh Kumari Phutela Date vs ). Smt Mithilesh Devi(Now Deceased) on 20 February, 2020

25. From the abovesaid specifications, it is evident that area of 12' X 12' with common wall, was sold to defendant no.1 out of the total area of property of plaintiff no.1, which was of plaintiff no.2 at that point of time as alleged in para 3 of plaint. This fact is averred by defendant no.1 herself in para no.2 & 3 of plaint in the suit bearing no. 6749/2016 titled Smt. Mithlesh Devi v. Santosh Kumari & Anr, filed by her against plaintiffs herein, the copy of which is Ex.DW1/2 (OSR). It is also stated therein that property no. A­81 is consisting of 6 shops and defendant no.1 is its owner and out of the same, one shop was sold to plaintiff therein I.e defendant no.1 herein. Thus, its admitted fact that apart from the abovesaid area of 12' x 12' with common walls, rest of the area of property no. A­81 is that of plaintiff no.1.
Delhi District Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. Komal And Another vs Smt. Sontosh Devi And 5 Others on 29 May, 2024

This first appeal from order has been filed on behalf of claimants-appellants for enhancement of compensation against the judgment and award dated 21.07.2016, passed by Motor Accident Courts Tribunal / Additional District Judge, Court No. 3, Muzaffar Nagar, in M.A.C.P. No. 593 of 2013 (Ankush @ rahul and others vs. Smt. Santosh Devi and another) by which compensation of Rs. 10,69,338/- along with 7% interest has been awarded to the claimants-appellants and liability has been fixed upon the respondent Insurance Company.
Allahabad High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - V C Dixit - Full Document
1