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

2019 Supreme(Del) 1612

PRATEEK JALAN
Om Prakash – Appellant
Versus
Amit Choudhary – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:V.K. Kalra, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Digvijay Singh, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order dated 19.11.2018 passed by the Additional District Judge-09 (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, in CS No. 1202/2017. By the said order, the Trial Court dismissed the application of the petitioner/plaintiff under Order XVIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as “the CPC”), seeking a direction upon the defendants to lead their evidence first.

Facts

2. The plaintiff filed the suit against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs.30,40,000/- alongwith interest thereupon. The plaintiff's case is that the defendants entered into a Collaboration Agreement dated 26.03.2014 with him for development and construction of a building on the suit property (property measuring 160 sq. yards, bearing property no. 11377-11378, Singhara Chowk, Nabi Karim, Idgah Road, Delhi). The plaintiff claims to have paid Rs.10,00,000/- out of the agreed consideration. The allegation of the plaintiff is that the defendants did not deliver possession of the suit property which was, in fact, sealed by municipal authorities. In addition to the refund of Rs.10,00,000/- claimed by hi

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