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

2004 Supreme(MP) 168

A.K.SHRIVASTAVA
SANTOSH BHARTI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF M. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.P.Mishra, Pramod Pandey

A. K. SRIVASTAVA, J.

( 1 ) BY this appeal preferred under Section 100, CPC, the plaintiffs have challenged the judgment and decree of the trial Court dismissing his suit and affirmed by the first appellate Court.

( 2 ) A suit for declaration and injunction has been filed by the plaintiffs that the 'blue print' of shopping complex which was shown to him by defendants Nos. 1, 2 and 3 be constructed in the Mission Colony, Damoh situated at Sagar-Jabalpur Road and the shops be allotted to them. According to the plaintiffs except the suit place, the defendants should not construct the shopping complex at any other place.

( 3 ) ACCORDING to the plaintiffs the defendants advertised an advertisement that they are going to construct a shopping complex and the intended purchaser may submit applications for the allotment of the shops. The plaintiffs approached Assistant Engineer N. K. Deshpande who told them that the proposed shopping complex shall be constructed at the place which has been indicated hereinabove and, accordingly, the plaintiffs deposited the amount and when the construction was raised, it was found by them the same is being raised at some other place. Hence a suit for declarat









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