Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
ANIL KSHETARPAL
Arun Khosla – Appellant
Versus
Shrimati Jyotsna Bhatia – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.
1. The present Appeal, under Section 10(1) of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966, is preferred against the Judgment dated 27.02.2025, [Impugned Judgement], passed by the learned Single Judge in CS(OS) 361/2016, titled “Mrs. Jyotsna Bhatia v. Mr. Arun Khosla & Ors.”. By the Impugned Judgment, the learned Single Judge dismissed IA No. 14141/2016, application preferred by the Appellants under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, [CPC], seeking rejection of the plaint instituted by the Respondent.
BRIEF FACTS:
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts germane, for the institution of the present Appeal, along with the family tree for the sake of brevity, are as follows:-
3. Late Sh. Bhim Sen Khosla, who is the father and the common ancestor of the parties herein, was the owner of a property bearing House No. B-98, Greater Kailash-I, New Delhi-110048, [Suit property]. Late Sh. Bhim Sen Khosla passed away on 19.03.1986, leaving behind the aforenoted Class I heirs. It is the case of the Respondent/Plaintiff therein that her father died intestate and the properties owned by him devolved upon his legal heirs accordingly. Thereafter, the P
The registration of a Will does not establish its validity; proof is essential, and the question of limitation cannot be determined at the pleading stage if the facts are disputed.
A cause of action must be assessed holistically, considering all relevant evidence, and cannot be dismissed solely based on preceding legal findings or limitations without a comprehensive examination....
The court emphasized that questions of limitation and cause of action are mixed issues of law and fact best resolved at trial, not at the application stage.
The court ruled that issues of limitation and contractual validity arising from disputed facts cannot be decisively adjudicated at the stage of rejecting a plaint, necessitating a trial based on evid....
The court held that the issue of limitation is a mixed question of law and fact, necessitating a full trial for resolution.
The trial court improperly relied on defendant's documents and evidence in dismissing the plaint at the preliminary stage under Order VII Rule 11, highlighting the necessity for evidence before decid....
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
