Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
VIPIN SANGHI, REKHA PALLI
Ravi Malhotra – Appellant
Versus
Prem Malhotra – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. co-ownership and joint possession are affirmed. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. court fees issue to be determined at final hearing. (Para 4) |
| 3. defendant's claims about possession are rejected. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. plaintiffs can remedy court fee deficiencies. (Para 9) |
| 5. appeal dismissed based on lack of merit. (Para 10) |
JUDGMENT
Vipin Sanghi, J. (Oral)--The present appeal is directed against the order dated 11.09.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge rejecting the appellant/defendant's application being I.A. No. 23748/2014 under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. The appellant has also assailed the order dated 05.10.2018 passed in Review Petition No. 383/2018, whereby the review sought by him against the order dated 11.09.2018 was also rejected.
2. The respondents/plaintiffs instituted a suit against the appellant/defendant to seek a decree for partition and permanent injunction in respect of property No. 17, Road No. 8, Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi on the premise that the plaintiffs and the defendant are co-owners of the said property.
3. After the demise of their father, Late Shri Jaidev Malhotra, the plaintiffs are residing in USA and therefore, the suit has been instituted through
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
