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

2018 Supreme(Raj) 341

PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Omprakash – Appellant
Versus
Kanchan Devi – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Rameshwar Hedau
For the Respondent: Mr. Prateek Rohiwal

ORDER :

Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.

For the reasons mentioned in the application under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC, the same is allowed. The applicant/legal representative, as mentioned in the application, is impleaded as party respondent in this case. The amended cause title already filed is taken on record.

2. Since learned counsel Mr. Prateek Rohiwal is already appearing on behalf of the newly added respondents, therefore, the service is complete.

3. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter has been heard finally.

4. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred with the following prayers:

"1. That the impugned order dated 14.02.2017 passed by learned District Court, Jodhpur District, in Civil Misc. "A" 77/2016 allowing the application under Section 24 Code of Civil Procedure, may kindly be quashed and set aside.

2. Any other appropriate order which this Hon'ble Court consider just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case, may kindly be passed in favour of the appellant."

5. The petitioner had filed civil suit bearing No. 37/2007 for declaration and permanent injunction before the learned Civil Judge, Pip











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