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

2007 Supreme(Del) 792

MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, SANJIV KHANNA
NITIN JAIN – Appellant
Versus
ANUJ JAIN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Naresh K.Thani


SANJIV KHANNA, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant herein. Mr. Nitin Jain along with. five others, who are the respondents 1-5 in the present Appeal had filed a suit No. 946/2000 for partition and rendition of accounts against the respondents 6-14. It was stated in the Suit that the appellant and the respondents herein belong to one family and are members of S. P. Jain (HUF ). The members of the said huf had also constituted smaller HUFs. Details of the properties owned by the said HUFs are mentioned in the annexure to the suit.

( 2 ) THE appellant and the respondents herein filed IA No. 2592/2001 under Order XXIII, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the Code, for short) for compromise. Paragraphs 2, 3 and the prayer clause in the application are relevant and are reproduced below:- "2. That the parties are in relation to each other. The plaintiffs are children of the defendants No. 2 to 5 and Nos. 7 to 10, and the defendants no. 2 to 5 are the sons of the defendants No. 1 and 6. The parties are constituents of various bigger and smaller HUFs, viz S. P. Jain (HUF) and others.

( 3 ) THAT during the pendency of the present proceedings, the parties hereto hav














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