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

1993 Supreme(Del) 155

MOHD.SHAMIM
PRITPAL SINOHAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF DELHI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Jitender Sarin, K.G.Bhagat, K.K.Sud, K.Vohra

Molid. Shamin

( 1 ) THIS is an application by one Pritpal Singhalto be released on bail.

( 2 ) THE case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and his son i. e. co-accused Suresh Singhal are the owners of a house situated at Behraenclave, New Delhi. They wanted to dispose the same of. Deceased Shyamsunder and Krishan Lal and injured Hans Raj and his brother Raj Kumaralias Raju were carrying on the business of property dca. hng under the nameand style of M/s. Vijay Properties at Bahadurgarh (Haryana ). S/shri Tilakraj, Tarsem Lal and Sarvar Lal all residents of Gurdaspur (Punjab) wantedto purchase the abovesaid property and a deal was struck for the purchaseof the said property for a consideration of Rs. 35 lacs. However, the saidconsideration was not passed on in full to the sellers and the same wasalleged to have been taken by the abovesaki property dealers, yet they werebringing pressure on the seller to execute the sale deed in respect of the saidproperty in favour of the proposed buyers. The sellers were, however, notready to submit to their demands. Deceased Shyam Sunder and his brotherraju approached the petitioner and his son on March 3, 19 91 and tried topressurise them t








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