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

2014 Supreme(Del) 1709

MANMOHAN SINGH
Mukesh Sondhi – Appellant
Versus
Hemant J. Sondhi – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Plaintiffs:Shantanu Singh, Advocate.
For the Defendants:Ishaan Chawla, Leena Tuteja, Advocates.

JUDGMENT

MANMOHAN SINGH, J.

1. By way of this order I propose to decide application being I.A. No. 1178 of 2010 under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC filed by the defendant No. 3 for deletion of his name from the array of parties in the suit filed for recovery by the plaintiffs against the defendants.

2. It is stated in the application that the plaintiff Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are brothers/sisters of the defendant No. 1. The defendant no. 2 is wife of the defendant No. 1. The defendant No. 3 is the father of the defendant No. 2. It is further stated that the suit for recovery has been filed by the plaintiffs against the defendants on the pretext that during the lifetime of the mother of the plaintiffs and the defendant Nos. 1 and 2, sold her self-acquired property bearing No. 219, Sector-28, Faridabad, measuring 166.66 sq. ft. (hereinafter referred to as the suit property).

The case of the plaintiff is that as per the Sale Deed, the property was valued at Rs. 8.75 lacs, however the value of the property at the time of sale was approximately Rs. 38 lacs and thus, there was undervaluation of the property in the sale deed.

3. It is stated by the defendant No. 3 that since defendant No. 3 is neither a n






















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