ARUN KUMAR JHA
Naresh Jha – Appellant
Versus
Chandan Kumar – Respondent
Arun Kumar Jha, J. – The present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 02.02.2023 passed by learned Sub Judge-IV, Rosera in Title Suit No. 199 of 2020 whereby and whereunder the learned trial court rejected the application dated 07.03.2022 of the intervenerpetitioner filed under Order 1, Rule 10 (2) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’).
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case, as it appears from the record, are that the plaintiff/respondent 1st set filed Title Suit No. 199/2020 before the court of learned Sub Judge- IV, Rosera for a decree of specific performance of contract in respect of agreement for sale dated 05.10.2018 executed by the defendant/respondent 2nd set with ancillary reliefs. The defendant appeared and filed his written statement and contested the suit. The intervener petitioner coming to know about the pendency of the suit approached the learned trial court and filed an application dated 07.03.2022 for impleading him as a party defendant under Order 1, Rule 10 (2) read with Section 151 of the Code. The plaintiff/respondent 1st set filed rejoinder dat
United Provinces vs. Mt. Atiqu Begum
Razia Begum vs. Sahebzadi Anwar Begum
Razia Begum vs. Sahebzadi Anwar Begum
P.C. Varghese vs. Devaki Amma Balambika Devi
Sumtibai vs. Paras Finance Co. Regd. Partnership Firm Beawer (Raj.)
Mumbai International Airport (P) Ltd. vs. Regency Convention Centre & Hotels (P) Ltd.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.