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
AMIT BANSAL
Rajiv Sareen – Appellant
Versus
Divyanshu Enterprises – Respondent


Table of Content
1. details of the plaintiff's agreements with the defendants. (Para 3)
2. defendants' arguments regarding the inapplicability of the plaintiff's claims. (Para 4 , 5)
3. plaintiff's reliance on case law to support their argument. (Para 6)
4. scope of order vii rule 11 of cpc in relation to plaint's assertions. (Para 7)
5. legal validity of the sale deed despite non-payment of entire consideration. (Para 12 , 14)
6. mou's inability to contradict terms of the registered sale deed. (Para 18)
7. need for specific details to support allegations of fraud. (Para 19)
8. conclusion on the rejection of the plaint. (Para 21 , 22 , 23)

JUDGMENT

Amit Bansal, J. (Oral)

[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]

I.A.14422/2021 (of the defendant No. 3 u/O-VII R-11 of the CPC)

1. This application has been filed on behalf of the applicant/defendant No. 3 Punjab National Bank (hereinafter referred to as the `defendant No. 3 Bank') under Order VII Rule 11 of the CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE , 1908 (CPC) seeking rejection of the plaint.

2. Notice in this application was issued on 9th November, 2021 and a reply has been filed on behalf of the non-applicant/plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the `plaintiff').

3. I

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