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

DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Rajesh Kumar Pandey – Appellant
Versus
Shanti Devi – Respondent


Table of Content
1. possession rights and history in property dispute. (Para 4 , 6)
2. unregistered documents cannot confer title. (Para 10 , 12)
3. claims based on unregistered documents have limited validity. (Para 11 , 15)
4. ownership requires registered documentation as per legal standards. (Para 14 , 17)
5. review petition dismissed; execution of decree permitted. (Para 19)

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done through video conferencing.

CM APPL. 17914/2021 (for exemption)

2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of.

CM APPL. 17913/2021 (for stay) in RSA 55/2007 and Review Petition 256/2019

3. The present application is for stay and suspension of the operation of judgment dated 13th March, 2015 passed in RSA 55/2007 titled Rajesh Kumar Pandey v. Shanti Devi & Anr..

4. The ground on which suspension is sought is that the Executing Court has passed an order on 5th April, 2021 that unless and until there is a stay on the order granted by this Court, the Court would proceed as per law. Thus, there is a likelihood of the suit property, being property No. 223/22-E, Gali No. 8, Railway Colony, Mandawali, Delhi-110092 (hereinaft

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