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

2012 Supreme(All) 2386

S.U.KHAN
KISHAN LAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Pradeep Chandra for the Petitioner; C.S.C. and S.N. Verma for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble S.U. Khan, J.—List revised. No one appears for the respondents. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and one Keshav since deceased and survived by respondent Nos. 4 to 7 have filed a suit for specific performance against respondent No. 8, Ganga Ram in the form of O.S. No. 437 of 1997 for specific performance of a registered agreement for sale alleged to have been executed by Ganga Ram defendant in favour of the plaintiffs on 31.10.1991. During pendency of the suit, petitioner filed an impleadment application stating therein that through registered sale-deed dated 23.8.1999 (during pendency of suit) he had purchased the property in dispute from Ganga Ram. The impleadment application was opposed by the plaintiffs. Trial Court/Civil Judge, Junior Divison, Jhansi rejected the impleadment application on 18.8.2004. Against the said order petitioner filed Civil Revision No. 153 of 2004, which was dismissed by A.D.J./Special Judge, (DAA), Jhansi on 22.4.2006, hence this writ petition.

2. The Courts below rejected the application placing reliance upon certain authorities according to which a rival claimant to the ownership is not a necessary or p



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