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

DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Ramesh Arya – Appellant
Versus
Pavan Arya – Respondent


Table of Content
1. background of the property dispute (Para 3 , 4)
2. nature of current suit and injunction requests (Para 5 , 6)
3. court's reasoning on injunction validity (Para 7 , 10 , 12)
4. considerations for trial court's adjudication (Para 8 , 9 , 11 , 13)
5. final order and directions (Para 14 , 15)

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.

CM APPL. 46581/2021 (for exemption)

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

CRP 101/2021 & CM APPLs. 46582/2021 & 46583/2021

3. The present petition challenges the impugned order dated 30th November, 2021 in CS No.807/17 titled Pavan Arya v. Ramesh Arya. Vide said order, the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, filed by the Defendant/Petitioner (hereinafter "Petitioner"), was dismissed. This litigation is between two brothers, Pavan Arya and Ramesh Arya, and the suit herein was instituted by the Plaintiff/Respondent (hereinafter "Respondent") in 2017 concerning the same property bearing No.A-135, Priyadarshini Vihar, New Delhi (hereinafter "suit property").

4. Between the memb

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