Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Ratika Datta – Appellant
Versus
Vandana Yogesh Bakshi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of tenants' claims and property (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments related to rent and tenancy issues (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court analysis on cause of action and suit progress (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. conclusion on trial court’s decision and costs (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. final dismissal of petition and applications (Para 10) |
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done in physical Court. Hybrid mode is permitted in cases where permission is being sought from the Court.
2. This is a petition challenging the impugned order dated 26th November 2020 by the Ld. ADJ-04, South District, Saket Courts, New Delhi (hereinafter "trial court") in CS DJ/207577/2016 titled Mrs. Vandana Yogesh Bakshi v. Ms. Ratika Datta. Vide the impugned order the trial court dismissed the application filed by the Petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 for the rejection of the plaint. The suit was filed by the Respondent for possession and damages with respect of suit property bearing No. A-1 Hauz Khas, New Delhi-110017 (hereinafter "suit property").
3. It is the case of the Respondent that the father-in-law of the Respondent had inducted one Dr. Tripta Datta as the tenant and sh
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
