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

1997 Supreme(Del) 647

K.S.GUPTA
SURENDRA KUMAR JAIN – Appellant
Versus
SANTOSH KUMAR JAIN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.B.Soni, R.P.Bansal, Ravinder Dayal

K. S. Gupta

( 1 ) THIS or derwill govern the disposal of l. As. 3951-52/97filed,by defendants 1 and 3. By filing I. A. 3951/97 defendants 1 and 3 seek to take the plea by way of preliminary objection 2a in their joint written statement as under:

"that the suit is bad for non joinder of necessary and proper party inasmuch as the defendant No. 2 Sh. Mehtab Singh Jain is the Karta of undivided H. U. F. and the fact that no partition of the suit propety has been made, the entire suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary and proper party. "following additional issue No. 3a is sought to be framed by filing I. A. 3952/97by defendants 1 and 2.

"whether the suit is bad for deletion/non-joinder of necessary and proper party to the suit ? If so, to what effect ?"

( 2 ) ONLY a few facts are necessary for deciding both the said I. As.

( 3 ) SURINDRA Kumar Jain and his wife Saroj Jain filed suit, inter alia, on the allegation that being owners they are in possession of ground, first, second, third and top floors of property No. 279, Ward No. 1v, situated in Bazar Dariba Kalan, Chandni Chowk, for the last about 20 years. Defendants 1 and 3 at the instigation of defendant No. 2 started using forcibly











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