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

2005 Supreme(Del) 407

MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, REKHA SHARMA
RAJIV SRIVASTAVA – Appellant
Versus
SANJIV TULI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.S.SURI, CHANDRASEKARAN, D.R.BHATIA, RASHMI RAI, S.K.MISHRA

MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 28th April, 2001 passed by the Additional District Judge, Delhi in Suit No. 104 of 2000 decreeing the aforesaid suit for possession in respect of flat bearing No. B-46, Hill View Apartment, Vasant Vihar, new Delhi and directing for handing over and vacating the suit premises to the respondents herein within a period of three months. It was also ordered that the claim for mesne profit/damages w. e. f 1. 4. 1999 till the date of delivery of the possession would be determined under Order 20 Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure by a separate enquiry. Therefore, in this particular appeal the scope of scrutiny would be confined to only the decree of possession, which was granted by the learned trial court in the aforesaid suit on the basis of an application filed by the respondents under Order 12 Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure. We had heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant on the said issue, at length, who had also taken us through the findings recorded and relevant documents.

( 2 ) THE aforesaid suit was filed by the respondent Sh. Sanjeev Tuli, who is the exclusive owner an











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