Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Surjeet Kaur – Appellant
Versus
Sardar Raja Singh Oberoi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for impleadment of additional defendant. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. financial institution's rights under sarfaesi act. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. challenging financial matters under sarfaesi act. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. claims regarding ownership and agreements. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. evaluation of necessity of impleadment. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 6. dismissal of application. (Para 29) |
JUDGMENT
Neena Bansal Krishna, J.
I.A. 17375/2021 (U/O I Rule 10 of CPC, 1908 for impleadment of proposed defendant No. 5-Religare Finvest Limited)
1. The present application under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "CPC") has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff seeking impleadment Religare Finvest Limited as defendant No. 5 in the array of parties.
2. It is submitted in the application that the plaintiff has filed the Suit for Partition and Possession of 50% of the residential property comprising House No. B-47, Greater Kailash-I, New Delhi-110048 admeasuring 896 sq. mts. (hereinafter referred to as "suit property") belonging to Late Sardarni Mohinder Kaur besides other relief for permanent injun
The proposed defendant, a financial institution, is not a necessary or proper party to the partition suit as their interest arises independently under the SARFAESI Act, which governs separate enforce....
Civil court jurisdiction not barred under SARFAESI for coparcener's (non-borrower) partition suit on ancestral property; appellate court may correct trial court's perverse injunction refusal; post-in....
Civil Courts retain jurisdiction over partition disputes despite the SARFAESI Act barring jurisdiction in matters concerning measures taken by secured creditors.
The bar under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act cannot be extended to claims involving collusion and fraud, which are better addressed before the Civil Court.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a plaintiff cannot suppress material facts to avoid a statutory bar and maintain a suit. The Court has the authority to consider circumstances....
The court established that suppression of material facts regarding a mortgage can bar a civil suit under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act.
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
