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

2023 Supreme(Del) 1705

JYOTI SINGH
Kamlesh Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Vakeel Ahmad – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Mr. Sachin Gupta & Ms. Swati Meena, Advocates, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Naushad Ahmad Khan, Advocate, for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

Jyoti Singh, J. (Oral)

1. Petitioner has filed the present revision petition laying a siege to an order dated 20.08.2019 passed by the Trial Court by which the application filed by the Petitioner under Order VII Rule 11 CPC has been dismissed. Petitioner herein is the Defendant before the Trial Court while the Respondent is the Plaintiff and parties hereinafter are referred to by their litigating status before the Trial Court.

2. From the facts captured in the revision petition it emerges that Defendant preferred a suit bearing No. 29/2014 against the Plaintiff herein for recovery of possession, arrears of rent, damages/mesne profits, use and occupation charges and permanent and mandatory injunction, wherein Plaintiff admitted that he was in possession of the suit property albeit by virtue of having made part payment towards purchase of the property and sought protection under Section 53A of Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The suit was decreed on 28.0.2015 and all reliefs, save and except, the relief of mandatory injunction were granted in favour of the Defendant. Both parties filed cross- appeals. Defendant appealed against the non-grant of mandatory injunction, but the

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