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

2019 Supreme(P&H) 658

DEEPAK SIBAL
Mohan Lal – Appellant
Versus
Raj Sharma – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:Mr. Bhavdeep Singh Mamli, Advocate, for the petitioners.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Deepak Sibal, J. (Oral) - The present petition is directed against the order dated 26.10.2018, passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri (for short, the Trial Court), striking off the petitioners’ defence on the ground that they had not filed the written statement within the mandatory period of ninety days of having putting in appearance before the Trial Court.

2. The facts, in brief, which are required to be noticed for adjudicating upon the present petition are that the respondent filed a suit seeking therein possession by way of partition by metes and bounds in respect of half share of her property detailed and described in the headnote of the plaint (for short, the suit property). Permanent injunction to restrain the petitioners/defendants from demolishing or changing the nature of the suit property was also sought.

3. On being put to notice, the petitioners, who were the defendants in the suit, appeared before the Trial Court on 01.04.2017 and thereafter the matter was adjourned thrice to enable the petitioners to file their written statement but they did not do so. On the third date i.e. 17.08.2017 the respondent filed an application u






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