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

2021 Supreme(HP) 18

SANDEEP SHARMA
Ritesh Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Pardeep Kumar Samantaroy – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Vivek Singh Attri, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. Aman Sood, Advocate.

JUDGMENT :

SANDEEP SHARMA, J.

1. Instant petition filed under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against order dated 18.12.2019 passed by learned Civil Judge, Dalhousie, District Chamba whereby an application having been filed by respondent-plaintiff (hereinafter, ‘plaintiff’) under Order VI rule 17 CPC, praying therein for amendment of plaint came to be allowed.

2. For having a bird’s eye view of the matter, certain undisputed facts emerge from the pleadings available on record are that plaintiff filed suit for permanent prohibitory and mandatory injunction restraining respondents/defendants (hereinafter, ‘defendants’) from interfering in any manner in the suit land comprised Khata Khatauni No.268/375, Khasra No. Kita 26, measuring 1-42-30 hectares situate at Mauja Bakrota, Tehsil Dalhousie, Chamba, Himachal Pradesh (hereinafter, ‘suit land’). Defendants in their written statement to the plaint specifically raised preliminary objection with regard to authorization and competence of the plaintiff to file the suit. Apart from above, defendants claimed in the written statement that the subject “Khyber House” is different property from St. John Church and the shops and 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