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

2024 Supreme(P&H) 360

ANIL KSHETARPAL
Naresh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Sweeti Gupta – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appearing Parties : Mr. Anuj Balian, Mr. Akshay Jindal

JUDGMENT :

Mr. Anil Kshetarpal, J. :- This is the defendants’ appeal against the order passed by the First Appellate Court, while remanding the case back to the trial court. In order to comprehend the issue involved in the present case, some relevant facts, in brief, are required to be noticed. The respondent (Smt. Sweeti Gupta) and her two minor sons filed a suit for the grant of decree of declaration that they are joint owners in possession of 1/6th share out of the property of defendant no.1. The plaintiff is widowed daughter-in-law of defendant no.1. Her suit was decreed on 30.08.2011. The defendants filed the first appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, the defendants filed an application under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’) in order to produce in additional evidence i.e. a copy of the Will and mutation on the basis of the Will. In substance, the defendants wanted to prove that the suit property is not an ancestral property. The First Appellate Court allowed the application and remanded the case back to the trial court for deciding afresh.

2. In SAO-57-2023, titled as “Abdul Quddoors Vs. Ajit Singh (since deceased) t

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