Back
J.K.RANKA
Key Pee Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Shahjahan Begum – Respondent
1. The instant revision petition has been preferred by the defendant-petitioner impugning the order dt. 07/10/2011 whereby its application under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC filed in a suit for cancellation, declaration, possession and injunction has been disallowed.
2. The brief facts germane to resolve the controversy are stated as under:
2.1. For the sake of brevity and expression, the petitioner herein has been referred to as the defendant and the respondent as plaintiff.
3. That on 21/12/2010, the plaintiff instituted a suitagainst the defendant for cancellation of a registered saledeed dt.11/09/2007 alongwith recovery of possession andother reliefs. In the plaint, the plaintiff avers that shealongwith other co-owners of the suit property agreed to salethe same to the defendant upon an oral contract, that aconsideration of Rs.3 Crore would be paid by the defendant.The plaintiff further avers that she only understands Urdulanguage and is not able to read or write either English orHindi language & the defendant on various occasions paid anamount of only
None identified. No entries contain keywords or phrases indicating the case has been overruled, reversed, abrogated, or otherwise treated as bad law (e.g., no mentions of "overruled," "reversed," "bad law," or similar negative treatments).
None. No entries contain explicit positive or other treatment patterns such as "followed," "distinguished," "criticized," or "questioned."
All cases fall into this category due to lack of any judicial treatment indicators.
Pratap Singh Choudhary VS Mahadev - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 2508: No treatment keywords or phrases present. Text appears to be a citation string referencing multiple cases (e.g., "Key Pee Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. v. Smt. ... Shahjahan Begum," "Triloki Nath Singh," "Pearlite Liners") with neutral phrasing like "apposite to refer to," but no explicit treatment of the identified case.
Sadanandan Bhadran VS Madhavan Sunilkumar - 1998 7 Supreme 20: No treatment keywords. Begins with "Important Point," suggesting a highlighted holding, but provides no indication of subsequent judicial treatment.
Om Prakash Srivastava VS Union of India - 2006 5 Supreme 751: No treatment keywords. Describes a legal principle on jurisdiction without reference to how the case itself was treated.
I. T. C. LTD. VS Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal - 1998 1 Supreme 90: No treatment keywords. Begins with "Important Point" and states a holding on fraud allegations, but no treatment indicators.
Rajasthan High Court Advocates Association VS Union Of India - 2001 3 Supreme 206: No treatment keywords. Outlines a jurisdictional holding without any mention of treatment.
Vidhyadhar VS Mankikrao - 1999 3 Supreme 102: No treatment keywords. Lists "Important Points" summarizing evidentiary and transactional rules, indicating key holdings but no subsequent treatment.
Navinchandra N. Majithia VS State Of Maharashtra - 2000 6 Supreme 114: No treatment keywords. Numbered points on cause of action and jurisdiction, presented as principles without treatment context.
Sopan Sukhdeo Sable VS Assistant Charity Commissioner - 2004 2 Supreme 40: No treatment keywords. Numbered points referencing Order VII Rule 11 and possession rights, but no explicit treatment.
Hardesh Ores Pvt. LTD. VS Hede and Company - 2007 0 Supreme(SC) 731: No treatment keywords. States a holding on negative covenants and limitation without treatment indicators.
Saleem Bhai VS State Of Maharashtra - 2003 1 Supreme 433: No treatment keywords. Begins with "VERY" (possibly truncated emphasis) followed by a point on Order 7 Rule 11, but no treatment language.
The Church of Christ Charitable Trust & Educational Charitable Society, represented by its Chairman VS Ponniamman Educational Trust represented by its Chairperson/Managing Trustee - 2012 4 Supreme 289: No treatment keywords. Lists topics (e.g., "Cause of action, power of attorney") without any descriptive text indicating treatment.
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
