NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Sneha Srivastava – Appellant
Versus
Amita Sinha – Respondent
JUDGMENT
I.A.14079/2021 (Seeking Return of Plaint)
1. An application under Order VII Rule 10 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the 'CPC') has been filed on behalf of defendant No.1 seeking return of plaint.
2. It is submitted that the plaintiff has filed a suit for Partition, Declaration, Cancellation, Permanent and Mandatory Injunction in respect to the property of the deceased husband Late Shri Ritesh Kumar Sinha and the matter is at the stage of completion of pleadings. The suit is in respect of various immovable properties and also in respect of movable properties. It is asserted that in terms of Section 16 of the CPC, a suit for partition can be filed only where the immovable property is situated. However, the properties in respect of which the partition is sought are located in Greater Noida. Since, no part of the immovable properties are situated in Delhi, this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present suit in regard to the immovable properties.
3. In respect of movable properties, it is submitted that none of the defendant resides within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Defendant No.1 is a permanent
Dalip Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (2010) 2 SCC 114
Kenche Gawda vs. Sidde Gawda (1994) 4 SCC 294
Rajiv Seth vs. Daya Kishan Mehra (2005) 84 DRJ 75
Ram Chander Talwar & Anr. vs. Devender Kumar Talwar (2010) 10 SCC 671
Ranjan Kumar Singh vs. Angoori Singh 2010 (116) DRJ 278
Seema Arshad Zahir & Ors. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. (2006) 5 SCC 282
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.