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

2025 Supreme(P&H) 113

VIKAS BAHL
Jatinder Arora – Appellant
Versus
Amit Mehta – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. Tarun Sarin Adv., Ms. Ridha Dhawan Adv.

Table of Content
1. jurisdiction of the high court under article 227. (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioner's failure to provide supporting documents. (Para 3 , 4)
3. dispute over property ownership and locus standi. (Para 5)
4. prima facie case favoring the respondent. (Para 6)
5. dismissal of the revision petition. (Para 7)

JUDGMENT :

Vikas Bahl, J.

Present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the impugned order dated 06.11.2024 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ludhiana in Civil Suit No.3380 of 2023 titled as “Amit Mehta Vs. Jatinder Arora”, whereby the application filed by the respondent under Order 38 Rule 5 CPC has been allowed and the petitioner was directed to furnish security in the shape of “surety bond” to the tune of Rs.13,00,000/-.

2. On a pointed query raised by this Court with respect to what transpired subsequent to the order dated 06.11.2024 and as to why the petitioner has approached the Court after a delay of more than three months, more so, when the impugned order dated 06.11.2024, reads as under:-

    “8. Accordingly, the defendant is directed to furnish the security in the shape of surety bond to th

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