SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(SC) 1189

J. B. PARDIWALA, R. MAHADEVAN
Time City Infrastructure And Housing Limited Lucknow – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates aooeared:
For the Petitioner: Shantanu Krishna, Adv.

Table of Content
1. background of property ownership dispute. (Para 1)
2. challenge to the trial court's order. (Para 2)
3. advocacy by the petitioner. (Para 3)
4. requirements for granting ex parte injunction. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
5. trial court to decide injunction on merits. (Para 8)
6. disposal of the special leave petition. (Para 9 , 10)

ORDER :

“Heard on the arguments of the Ld.Counsel for the plaintiff on the Application C-6 with affidavit C-7 of the plaintiff on ad interim Injunction.

It is the stated by the Counsel for the plaintiff that on 21.06.2015, after the full and final payment Rs.3,60,12,782/- (Rupees Three Crores Sixty Lakhs Twelve Thousand Seven Hundred and Eighty-Two Only) to the defendant No.1 as Sale Consideration, the defendant No.1 had handed over the peaceful physical possession of the land to the plaintiff. After the physical possession of the Suit Land, the plaintiff had merged the said plot of land in its adjoining plotting sites and invested huge funds in terms of lacs and lacs of rupees to and Eighty-Two Only) to the defendant No.1 as Sale Consideration, the defendant No.1 had handed over the peaceful physical possession of the land to the plaintiff. After the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top