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

2009 Supreme(P&H) 1199

RAJIVE BHALLA
Parsani Devi – Appellant
Versus
Angrej Singh – Respondent


Judgment

Rajive Bhalla, J.

1. The appellants impugn the judgments and decrees dated 30.4.1998 and 25.01.2002, passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Ambala and the Additional District Judge, Ambala, decreeing the suit for specific performance filed by respondent no. 1 and dismissing their appeal.

2. Before proceeding to adjudicate the appeal, it would be necessary to mention here that vide order dated 21.08.2006, appellant no. 1 Smt. Parsani Devi was allowed to withdraw from the appeal. It was however, ordered that the appeal would proceed on behalf of Smt. Lajjo. who is the recipient of the suit property from Smt. Parsani Devi, pursuant to a collusive decree dated 19.08.1991.

3. The plaintiff?respondent no. 1 filed a suit for possession, by way of specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 9.08.1991, executed by Maya Chand as general power of attorney of Parsani Devi. As per the recitals in the agreement, the sale deed was to be executed on 5.06.1992. It was pleaded that as after the execution of the agreement, Parsani Devi and Maya Chand her attorney, made an attempt to alienate the suit land, a suit was filed for grant of a permanent injunction. On 17.08.1991, Parsan





























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