Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 39 (0.33 seconds)
Smt. Madhuri Gupta­ Wife vs Sh. Ajay Raj Singh (Deceased) on 31 October, 2019 cites

Nirmala Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh 40 Wps/432/2017 ... on 18 May, 2018

60. It is further deposed by DW1 that she does not remember about any bank account of Sat Prakash Gupta other than his account with Syndicate Bank, Chandni Chowk, Delhi and that she does not remember about the balance amount in the said account during the period of April­May 1986. No document has been placed on record to show the account balance during the relevant period. It is also pertinent to note that no draft or cheque has been placed on record to show the readiness and willingness of Sat Prakash to tender the remaining amount. With respect to stamp papers, it has been submitted that though the same were purchased but they cannot be placed on record as they were handed over to A.R. Singh. However, there is nothing on record to show that any stamp papers were ever purchased by Sat Prakash Gupta nor any witness has been examined in this regard. No notice of discovery has ever been sent on behalf of Sat Prakash for production of alleged stamp papers. There is no receipt showing the handing over of the stamp papers to A.R. Singh. It is also No.2094/18 SAT PRAKASH VS. AJAY RAJ SINGH Page No. 32 of 34 pertinent to note that requisite stamp papers have been placed on record in connected suit between the parties bearing no. 95141/16 titled as 'Madhuri Gupta v A.R. Singh' which is suit for specific performance of agreement to sell Flat no. 9. Qua this, DW1 has deposed in her cross examination dated 30.07.19 that she has no reason to say why stamp papers with respect to flat no. 9 were filed in aforementioned suit but not filed in present suit. Hence, even this theory cannot be believed.
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 4774 - M M Shrivastava - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next