RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
Chanchal Devi – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Development Authority – Respondent
CMs No.34762/2018 & 34763/2018 in RSA No.121/2018 & CMs No.34766/2018 & 34767/2018 in RSA No.122/2018 (all for exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
2. The applications are disposed of.
RSA 121/2018 & CM No.34761/2018 (for stay) & RSA 122/2018 & CM No.34765/2018 (for stay)
3. These two Regular Second Appeals under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) impugn the judgments and decree [both dated 31st May, 2018 in RCA No.01/2017 and RCA No.56/2016, both of the Court of Senior Civil Judge (North-West)] allowing the First Appeals under Section 96 of the CPC preferred by the respondent Delhi Development Authority (DDA) against the judgments and decree [both dated 17th October, 2016, in CS No.559/2014 (Case No.9578/2016) and CS No.529/2014 (Case No.9577/2016), both of the Court of Civil Judge (West)] allowing the suits filed by each of the appellant/plaintiff for permanent injunction restraining the respondent/defendant DDA and Station House Officer (SHO), Police Station Sultanpuri, Delhi from demolishing the construction of the house of each of the appellant/plaintiff and from dispossessing each of the appellant/plaintiff therefrom.
4. Though both the
Anathula Sudhakar Vs. P. Buchi Reddy
Kashmir Singh Vs. Harnam Singh
Kulwant Kaur Vs. Gurdial Singh Mann
Mandal Revenue Officer Vs. Goundla Venkaiah
S.R. Tewari Vs. Union of India
Santosh Hazari Vs. Purushottam Tiwari
Sir Chunilal V. Mehta Vs. Century Spinning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.