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

DELHI HIGH COURT
AMIT BANSAL
Kailash Vohra – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Amit Bansal, J. (Oral)--The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the order dated 7th May, 2018 passed by the Probate Court in P.C. No. 50443/16 whereby the impleadment application filed by the respondent no. 4 under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, (CPC), 1908, was allowed and respondent no. 4 was allowed to file objections in the Probate proceedings.

2. The litigation between the parties with respect to the estate of deceased testator, Sh. KL Jain, viz. property bearing no. T-4, T-5 and T-6, Usha Chamber, Ashok Vihar, New Delhi hereinafter (Property) has had a chequered history, which is set out hereinafter.

3. A suit for permanent and mandatory injunction qua the Property was filed by Roopa Vohra, daughter of the petitioner herein, against Sh. K.L. Jain in his lifetime. The said suit was dismissed by the Trial Court vide judgment dated 24th March, 2012. Roopa Vohra filed an appeal bearing no. RCA No. 3/2012 against the said dismissal. During the pendency of the said appeal, Sh. K.L. Jain expired on 15th December, 2013. An application for impleadment of legal heirs of Sh. K.L. Jain was filed, which was allowed vide orde

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