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

2017 Supreme(Raj) 951

DINESH MEHTA
Islam son of late Mustaq – Appellant
Versus
Chiraguddin son of Sheikh Chhotu – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:S.K. Dadhich, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Ranjeet Joshi, Advocate.

ORDER :

Dinesh Mehta, J.

1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner has laid challenge to the order dated 17.10.2016, passed by the Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, Nava, District Nagour, whereby the agreement dated 25.3.1983 has been taken on record and the application filed by the petitioner-defendant under Section 49 of the Registration Act has been rejected.

2. Facts in brief, appertain to the present case are that the plaintiff Chiraguddin, the respondent No. 1 herein, filed a suit for mandatory and permanent injunction, seeking possession of the house and recovery of the arrears of rent. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff's application under Order 7, Rule 14 (3) Code of Civil Procedure came to be allowed vide order dated 01.9.2016, whereby the agreement dated 25.3.1983 was taken on record by the Trial Court. After taking of the document on record, the petitioner-defendant moved an application dated 13.10.2016, interalia raising objection regarding its admissibility in light of provisions of Section 49 of the Registration Act, contending interalia, that the document in question is not admissible in evidence, sans registration.

3. Trial Court rejected th














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