R.A.MEHTA
FATEHSINHRAO PRATAPSINHRAO GAEKWAD – Appellant
Versus
SAVJIBHAI HARIBHAI PATEL – Respondent
( 1 ) A short and simple question has taken considerable time at the lengthy hearing of this Revision Application. The question is whether the trial court was justified in granting the plaintiffs application for joining additional defendants under 0. 1 R. 10 (2) C. P. C. They are the specified authority competent authority and State Government under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act 1976
( 2 ) THE respondent no. 1 original plaintiff has filed Special Civil Suit No. 70 in the Court of the learned Civil Judge Senior Division Baroda for a declaration that the agreement and irrevocable power of attorney dt. 24/03/1977 and the affidavit-cum-declaration dt. 10/02/1978 are valid sub- sisting and binding on the defendant (the petitioner herein) and for due performance of the agreement and other directions for the said purpose and for a permanent injunction against breach of the said contract and irrevocable power of attorney and from interfering and not obstructing the opponent-plaintiff from acting thereunder and representing before the authorities under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act 1976 and for restraining the defendant from making any application f
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.