SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(Raj) 1725

MAHESH BHAGWATI
Chittar Lal – Appellant
Versus
Additional District Sessions Judge others – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioners: Vivek Chaudhary, Counsel.

JUDGMENT

1. - Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 6th April, 2012, whereby the Additional District Judge (Fast Track), No.1, Jaipur District, Jaipur dismissed the application of the petitioners-applicants filed under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners canvassed that the applicants being the legal representatives of late Shri Harbux, they were entitled to get their share in the disputed property. The plaintiff and defendants in collusion with each other filed a suit for specific performance of contract so as to deprive the petitioners from their right to get the ancestral property. They were the necessary party in the suit, but the learned trial court arbitrarily rejected their application and gainsaid to implead them as party in the suit.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record, it is noticed that an agreement to sale with regard to disputed property was executed by the defendants in favour of the plaintiff. Hence, the contractual relationship was between the plaintiff and defendants. The defendants are found to be the fathers of the applicants-petitioners. No entry was made 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