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

2007 Supreme(Del) 111

J.M.MALIK
RAM KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
RAVINDER KUMAR GULATI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Bipin Kumar, S.Muthu Krishnan, S.NANDA KUMAR


J. M. MALIK, J.

( 1 ) CM 16122/2006 (u/s 5 of the Limitation Act) the delay in filing the present appeal is condoned and the application stands disposed of. FAO 377-78/2006 1. Both the Trial Court and the first Appellate Court have handed down a verdict that Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain this suit. Adumberated in brief, the case of the appellants is this. Appellants purchased a property comprising of ground floor measuring 87 square yards approximately, bearing No. 11/4-A (l) Tilak Nagar, for a consideration of Rs. 2,80,000/- from respondent No. 1 after appellant was assured that the property is free from all encumbrances or charges etc. The agreement was also executed in this regard. In the meantime, it transpired on 19. 4. 2005 that respondent No. 1 had taken loan from Citi Bank, respondent No. 2 against the hypothecation of suit property. In their written statement the bank, respondent No. 2 made the following averments. The respondent No. 1 entered into a loan agreement with the respondent No. 2 bank in the month of March 2002 and took loan in the sum of Rs. 29,00,000/- against the entire property No, 11/4-A (l) Tilak Nagar, Delh. The said borrower undertook to








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