Amita Sharma vs Ajay Sharma - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 2795

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(P&H) 2795

ARCHANA PURI
Amita Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Ajay Sharma – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
Mr.Prateek Sodhi, Advocate; For the Petitioners
Mr.Sukhpal Singh, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
Mr.Amit Sharma, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

JUDGMENT

Archana Puri, J.

Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order dated 17.04.2023, passed by learned Court below, whereby, an application under Order 32, Rule 3 CPC, filed by the present petitioners, was dismissed and also allowed the application under Order 1, Rule 10, purported to have been filed by respondent No.2 i.e. Dr.Sita Sharma.

2. In pursuance of the notice issued, respondents made appearance through their respective counsel.

3. Learned counsel for the parties heard.

4. The facts, as culled out from the paperbook, are as follows:-

That, initially, Dr.Amita Sharma and Dr.Arpana Raj, who are petitioners before this Court, together with their mother Dr.Sita Sharma (who is respondent No.2 in the present petition), had filed a suit for declaration against Dr.Ajay Sharma, who is brother of the petitioners and son of respondent No.2 i.e. Dr.Sita Sharma, who was plaintiff No.3 before the Court below.

5. During the pendency of the said suit, the petitioners, who are daughters of Dr.Sita Sharma, had filed an application under Order 32, Rule 3 CPC for appointment of applicant-plaintiff No.1 i.e. Dr.Amita Sharma, as guardian of plaintiff No.3-Dr.Sita Sharma. Even, a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document