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

2000 Supreme(Del) 657

MUKUL MUDGAL
ANU SETH – Appellant
Versus
ROHIT NARAIN SETH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ARUN KHOSLA, D.R.THADANI, MANISHA SINGH, Sanjay Gupta, Varsha Yagnik

Mukul Mudgal

( 1 ) THE plaintiff No. 1 is the wife of defendant No. 1 and the plaintiffs 2 and 3 are their children. Defendant Nos. 2 and 3 are the parents, and defendant No. 6 is the brother, defendant No. 4 is the uncle, defendant No. 5 is the aunt, defendant No. 8 is the cousin of defendant No. 1. It is the plaintiff s case that plaintiff No. 1 was married to defendant No. 1 and stayed in the matrimonial home at 6a, Jantar Mantar Road, New Delhi for 8 years. The plaintiff No. 1 has further averred in the plaint that owing to matrimonial disharmony, she left the matrimonial home alongwith plaintiffs 2 and 3 and took shelter in her parents house on 13th August 1999. The plaintiff No. 1 has further stated that she is being denied the access to the matrimonial house by the defendants and consequently seeks a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from obstructing the ingress and egress of the plaintiffs to her matrimonial home i. e. at 6a, Jantar Mantar, New Delhi. The plaintiff No. 1 has further pleaded that she is seeking access only to the suite marked blue in the site plan in which she was residing with plaintiffs 2 and 3 and defendant No. 1 and this portion o













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