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

1988 Supreme(Del) 82

JAGDISH CHANDRA
PUSHPA KAPA – Appellant
Versus
SHIV KUMAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
J.N.Verma, P.N.Kumar

Jagdish Chandra, J.

( 1 ) IN this suit for possession and damages for use and occupation of the property in suit the entire evidence was recorded and concluded and the suit was set for final hearing. Instead of hearing the arguments of parties counsel on all the issues, arguments were heard only on issue No. 1 which dealt with the correctness of the valuation put in the plaint and vide order dated 11th January 1988 it was held that the market value of the property in suit was less then Rs. 100. 000 on the date of the filling of. the suit and consequently the High Court was not empowered to entertain and decide this suit. This fact was conceded by the learned counsel for both the parties. The plaint was, therefore, ordered to be returned to the plaintiff for presentation to the District Judge and for this purpose the plaintiff was directed to appear before the Deputy Registrar on 14th January 1988. On that day i. e. 14th January 1988 the plaintiff filed this application under section 24 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure who chose not to receive back the plaint for presentation to the court of the District Judge. Notice of this application was issued to the defenda





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