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

2019 Supreme(HP) 1517

SANDEEP SHARMA
Prabhi Devi – Appellant
Versus
Shankri Devi – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Ajay Shandil, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate, for the Respondent

JUDGMENT

Sandeep Sharma, J. - Instant petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India lays challenge to order dated 4.4.2018, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Court No.3, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P. in CS No. 120-1 of 2017-12, whereby an application under Order 8, Rule 1A (3) CPC having been filed by the petitioner-defendant (in short "the defendant") for placing on record copy of Pariwar Register of the family came to be rejected.

2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused material adduced on record by the respective parties vis--vis reasoning assigned in the impugned order passed by the learned court below, this Court finds no illegality and infirmity in the same, because bare perusal of application (Annexure P-4) filed under Order 8, Rule 1A (3) CPC, nowhere suggests that plausible explanation, if any, is rendered on record by the defendant that despite due diligence, she could not produce the record earlier with regard to her marriage with deceased Ram Dass.

3. In the instant case, respondent-plaintiff (in short "the plaintiff") filed suit for declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction under sections 34, 37 and 38 of the Specific Rel

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