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

2022 Supreme(Raj) 1388

SUDESH BANSAL
Rajkumar Kothari – Appellant
Versus
Dhan Kumar – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Mr. J.P. Goyal Sr. Advocate, assisted by Mr. Nikhil Yadav, for the Appellant.

ORDER

1. Petitioner-defendant No.6 has filed this instant revision petition, feeling aggrieved by dismissal of his application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC vide impugned order dated 02.03.2022 passed by Additional District Judge No.4, Jaipur Metropolitan II in suit No.226/2014.

2. It appears from record that respondent-plaintiff No.1 has filed civil suit for partition against the petitioner and other respondents which is pending before the trial Court.

3. Counsel for petitioner submits that respondent-plaintiff has filed the present civil suit mainly claiming his right of partition on the basis of will dated 04.05.1989. Respondent-plaintiff has not produced any will along with plaint and now his statements have been recorded but plaintiff has not produced the will on record.

4. As per plaint, will dated 04.05.1989 is the basic and foundational document to continue proceedings of partition as the plaintiff has claimed right of partition solely on the basis of will.

5. Counsel for petitioner submits that since respondent-plaintiff has not produced the basic document of will on record before the trial Court, the suit is liable to be dismissed on this account alone.

6. Petitioner-defendant No.6

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