M/S Cna Exports P.Ltd. vs Janak Datwani . on 5 December, 2017
Ex. 29/19 CNA Vs. Janak Datwani & Anr Dated 26.07.2021 Page no.14 of 13
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.24 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Cna Exports Pvt. Ltd. vs Mrs. Jaskirat Datwani on 26 July, 2010
20. It further shows that the Hon'ble Division Bench of the
Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the order dated 26.07.2010 passed in
FAO (OS) No. 152/2008 titled CNA Exports Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mrs.
Jaskirat Datwani & Ors. has noted that 24% share of the property
in question is in the possession of JD no.1 since he is the 99%
shareholder in CNA Export Pvt. Ltd. Further it is seen that the
Hon'ble Delhi High Court has held in the judgment dated
26.07.2010 that the shareholding of the DH company is
fragmented. Further share of the property of DH company, which
is the subject matter of the present execution petition is in dispute
and is the subject matter of 5 suits pending in the Delhi High
Court being suit no. CS(OS) No.118/2007, CS(OS) No.1113/2007,
CS(OS) No.556/2008, CS(OS) No. 1798/2011 and CS(OS)
No.244/2013.
Sushma Ravidas vs Jamna Datwani & Ors on 9 March, 2021
21. Further the Hon'ble Division Bench vide order dated
28.08.2014 in FAO (OS) 118/2014 titled Sushma Ravidass Vs.
Jamna Datwani & Ors has held that "since an issue concerning
shareholding of the Datwani Family in CNA Exports Pvt. Ltd. is in
issue in the suit in question, every family member to whom shares
were allotted when the company was incorporated would be a
proper party, if not necessary party so that a decision in the suit
binds all".
Indian Associates vs Shivendra Bahadur Singh And Ors. on 21 February, 2003
23. Also in the case of Indian Associates Vs Shivender
Bahadur Singh AIR 2003 DEL 292 (295) (DB), it has been held
that in the testamentary proceeding a person or legal entity who has
interest in the suit can be permitted to be intervened/impleaded.
Section 151 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Jamna Datwani vs Janak Datwani & Ors on 2 September, 2020
In 2003 JD No.3 filed a suit for
partition being Suit no.698/2003 titled Jaskirat Datwani Vs. Janak
Datwani & Ors, wherein JD No.1 was the defendant no.1 and DH
herein was the defendant no.3. No objection with regard to JD
No.1 being party to the main suit was raised by the DH herein in
the suit proceedings at any stage. The Court has passed the final
decree on 17.04.2007 thereby partitioning the property considering
all parties and their status in the suit. Neither the court nor any
party including DH has raised any dispute to the position of JD
No.1 at this stage as well. The DH herein has filed appeals from the
order passed in the aforesaid suit wherein JD No.1 has been made a
party by the DH itself.
1