Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.73 seconds)Sunil Narula vs Shelly Juneja & Ors on 14 October, 2014
"Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, contends
that pursuant to execution of the Will by their mother,
the petitioners are in possession of the suit property.
They have been given a portion of the house in question
as per the said Will. Hence, in view of the judgment
delivered by this Court in Sunil Narula Vs. Shelly Juneja
and others, 2015 (3) RCR (Civil) 1027, they are not
required to affix the ad valorem Court fee in respect of
their share in the suit property of which, they are seeking
3 of 7
::: Downloaded on - 10-06-2016 21:36:37 :::
CR No. 6446 of 2015(O&M) 4
possession.
Neelavathi And Ors vs M. Natarajan And Ors on 30 November, 1979
In support of his contentions, he has relied upon the
judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Neelavathi and others Vs.
M. Natarajan and others 1980 SCC(2) 247 and of this Court in
Narula Vs. Juneja and others in CR No. 6451 of 2013 decided on
14.10.2014 to contend that the Court fee is not liable to be paid if the
plaintiffs continue to be in joint possession of the properties.
1