Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.19 seconds)Suraj Lamp & Industries (P) Ld.Tr.Dir vs State Of Haryana & Anr on 11 October, 2011
7. Defendant No. 2 was proceeded against ex-parte whereas defendant
No. 1 filed written statement wherein while raising legal objections
regarding the maintainability of the suit and about the valuation of
the suit, stated that plaintiff's claim of ownership based on notarised
document was not sustainable in view of the ruling of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in "Surya Lamp v. State of Haryana & Anr." (2009)
7 SCC 363. As per defendant, plaintiff purchased the suit property
after selling the property bearing No. 120, measuring 50 sq. yds., Lal
Dora, Holambi Kalan, Delhi which was the ancestral property,
therefore defendant No. 1 and her children have share in the suit
property and plaintiff cannot maintain the present suit. The suit
property was purchased in the year 1989 and since then the defendant
No.1 has been residing in the suit property and plaintiff admitted in
his own handwriting that defendant No. 1 has been residing in the
said property for the last more than 33 years. Plaintiff and his other
family members have an evil eye upon the suit property and
consequently they are regularly harassing, humiliating and torturing
defendant No.1 and in this regard a complaint to police officials have
been made but police officials in connivance with the plaintiff had
not taken any action. Hence, it has been prayed that suit filed by the
plaintiff be dismissed.
Section 96 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Inder Singh vs Kamla Devi --Respondent on 10 February, 2011
1. This judgement shall dispose of appeal under section 96 CPC filed by
appellants against judgement and decree dated 04.11.2020 passed by
Ld. JSCJ, North, Delhi in Suit No. 538181/16 titled as "Inder Singh
v. Kamla Devi & Ors." whereby suit filed by respondent herein was
decreed against the appellants.
1