PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Kular Construction Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Gurnam Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
1. The present case is a classic example of how litigation can be protracted by parties, only with a view to avoid payment of court fee. A case which ought to have been a simple suit for recovery has been designed as a declaratory suit leading to framing of a preliminary issue which is being decided by the present order. The preliminary issue framed in the suit is:
“Issue no.2 - Whether the present suit for declaration in respect of a recovery claim is maintainable in law?”
2. The reliefs prayed for in the suit are as under:
“(a) That the Decree of Declaration may kindly be passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant declaring that the defendant has no right, title or interest in 4475 sq feet and 5000 sq feet commercial area on 3rd and 4th floor of the K-Mall, Link Road, Near Bus Stand, Ludhiana, Punjab respectively in case the past, present and future maintenance charges are not paid to the plaintiff.
or in the alternative
A Decree of Declaration may kindly be passed declaring that the plaintiff is entitled to adjust the unpaid maintenance charges and take back the commercial area from the defendant in view of the Agreement dated 25.05.200
Anil Kumar Handa v. Smt. Suma Bala AIR 1980 Del 103
Banarsi Dass Durga Prashad vs. Panna Lal and Ors. AIR 1969 P&H 57
Dhannalal vs. Kalawatibai and Ors. AIR 2002 SC 2572
Halima Bivi v. Fatima Bivi AIR 1987 Mad 129
Madhav Rao Jivaji Rao Scindia v. Union of India (1971) 1 SCC 85: AIR 1971 SC 530
Mahabir Jute Mills v. Firm Kedar Nath AIR 1960 All. 254
Management Committee of Montfort Senior Secondary School vs. Vijay Kumar and Ors. AIR 2005 SC 3549
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.