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

2019 Supreme(P&H) 1923

SANJAY KUMAR
Parvas Kaul – Appellant
Versus
Parul Kaul – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Amit Jain, Advocate, Sachin Mittal, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Sanjay Kumar, J. - The petitioner in this civil revision, filed under Article 227 of the Constitution, is the husband and the respondent herein is his wife.

2. The respondent-wife filed Civil Suit No.31037 of 2014 on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gurugram (hereinafter, 'the trial Court'), praying for a preliminary decree for possession by way of partition, declaring her share to be half and the share of the petitioner-husband, the defendant therein, to be the remaining half in respect of the house property detailed in para-1 of the plaint. The petitioner-husband filed his written statement contesting the suit claim in April, 2015. Thereafter, he filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC on 17.12.2015, seeking to amend his written statement by adding a paragraph in Preliminary Objection-6 thereof. By order dated 06.02.2017, the trial Court dismissed the application. Aggrieved thereby, he is before this Court.

3. By order dated 22.02.2017 passed in this revision, this Court directed the trial Court to adjourn the case beyond the date fixed for the hearing of this revision viz. 22.03.2017. Thereafter, the said interim order was continued and is op

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