Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Mohd. Nadeem – Appellant
Versus
Mohd. Rafi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenged judgment upheld decree for injunction. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding jurisdiction and title asserted. (Para 5) |
| 3. no ancestral rights under muslim law established. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. muslim law restricts property rights until death of ancestor. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. defendant granted time to vacate property with conditions. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done by video conferencing.
2. This is a second appeal challenging the impugned judgment dated 10th October, 2019 in RCA No. 41/2017, passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, by which the Appellate Court has upheld the decree dated 15th July, 2017 passed by Trial Court in CS No. 568/16. The dispute is between the Plaintiff/Respondent who is the father (hereinafter, "plaintiff") and the Defendant/Appellant who is the son (hereinafter, "defendant").
3. The Plaintiff filed a suit filed for permanent and mandatory injunction against the Defendant. The case of the Plaintiff is that he is in lawful possession of the property bearing No.1250, Gali Jaman Wali, Kalan Mehal, Darya Ganj, Delhi ("hereinafter, "suit prop
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
