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

2016 Supreme(MP) 1067

NANDITA DUBEY
ASHOK KUMAR DUBEY – Appellant
Versus
PARWATI BAI – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :R.P. Khare, Advocate
For the Respondent:K. Agarwal, Advocate

ORDER :

NANDITA DUBEY, J.

1. With the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, this petition is finally heard.

This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioners assailing the order dated 19-1-2016 in Civil Suit No. 32-A/2008 passed by Additional Judge to the Court of Civil Judge Class-I, Sihora, District Jabalpur whereby the application of the plaintiff under Order 1, Rule 10, Civil Procedure Code for impleading the subsequent purchasers of the suit land (Khasra No. 326 and 373) was rejected.

2. Shri R. P. Khare, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that an application under Order 1, Rule 10, Civil Procedure Code for impleading the subsequent purchaser as defendant was moved on the basis of information that during pendency of the suit defendant/respondent had sold the disputed suit land Khasra No. 326 Area 0.260 Hectare and Khasra No. 373 Area 1.500 Hectare Village Umariya to one Shri R. K. Tiwari, Smt. Sushma Gupta and Anurag Shrivastava by registered sale deeds. This fact was admitted by the defendants' witness Ravishankar Pandey (DW-1) in Para 7 of his deposition. It is further urged that as the present defendants/respondents hav
























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