Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Neeta Bhardwaj – Appellant
Versus
Kamlesh Sharma – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. right to pooja sewa and legal heirship (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. disputed claims of pooja sewa by defendants (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. local commissioner's role and findings (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. commercial control over temple activities (Para 12 , 13) |
| 5. unclear authority of pujaris over pooja sewa (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. court directions for receiver appointments (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 7. affidavit requirements and accountability (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 8. implementation of court orders and future hearings (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done through hybrid mode (physical and virtual hearing).
CM APPL. 2915/2021(for exemption)
2. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
3. Application is disposed of.
CM APPL. 2916/2021 (for dispensing service to Respondents No. 2 to 6)
4. Considering the nature of the disputes, this Court deems it appropriate to issue notice to Respondents Nos. 2 to 6. Let notice be served through the counsel appearing for the said Respondents before the trial court. Application is disposed of.
FAO 36/2021 and CM APPL. 2914/2021 (for stay), & CM APPL. 3573/2021 (for appointment of Receiver)
5. The disput
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
