Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
Nathu Ram – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Development Authority – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership and possession of suit property by the plaintiffs. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. dda's claim over khasra no. 48/5 and the opposition from the plaintiffs. (Para 3 , 6) |
| 3. local commissioner's report on property demarcation. (Para 4 , 5 , 9) |
| 4. arguments by dda claiming possession and asserting rights. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 5. appellate court's observations regarding the evidence and possession. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 6. court's emphasis on due process and burden of proof on plaintiffs. (Para 22 , 30) |
| 7. final determination of the appellate court dismissing the appeal. (Para 36 , 38) |
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Brief Facts
1. The Plaintiffs - Mr. Surat Singh and his son - Mr. Nathu Ram/Appellant herein (hereinafter "Plaintiff"), have filed a suit for perpetual injunction before the Senior Sub-Judge, Delhi, being Suit No.390/2006 titled Sh. Surat Singh & Anr. v. DDA.The case of the Plaintiffs was that they have been in possession as owners of 2,500 sq. yds. of land forming part of Khasra No. 48/7 in the revenue estate of Humayunpur, New Delhi (hereinafter "suit property"), since the time of their forefathers. The Plaintiffs claim to have constructed a house bearing no. 20-B, Krishan Nag
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
