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

1996 Supreme(Del) 144

N.G.NANDI
VINIT KUMAR GUPTA – Appellant
Versus
PRADIP KUMAR GUPTA – Respondent


N. G. Nandi, J.

( 1 ) ON attaining the majority, the plaintiff has filed the suit for declaration that the agreements, one dated 1. 7. 1977 and the other dated 21. 8. 1979, executed between defendants No. 1to 5 and the General Power of Attorney, are null and void and not binding on the plaintiff or alternatively that the same have become infructuous and can not be enforced now and for a decree for possession of the property directing defendant No. 5 to hand over the possession of the suit property to the plaintiff and also restraining defendants 1-4 by permanent injunction from selling the property to defendant No. 5 or to any body else and also further restraining defendant No. 1 from demolishing the original structure built or portion of original construction or any portion and from making any new construction or alienating the property in any manner. The plaintiff by this IA, seeks to restrain defendant No. 5 from further demolishing the original structure or changing physical features of the suit property in any manner or to make fresh construction thereon pending the hearing and disposal of the suit.

( 2 ) THE say of the plaintiff is that by perpetual lease deed dated 8. 3. 19


















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