SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
Chintamani – Appellant
Versus
Ajay Kumar – Respondent
ORDER
1. No one appears for the respondents despite issuance of SPC.
2. The instant revision under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’) assails the order dated 4.10.2017 (Annexure A/1) passed by the Sixth Civil Judge, Class-I, Khandwa in Civil Suit No.12-A/2015, whereby the application under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC filed by the petitioners/defendants has been rejected.
3. The brief facts leading to filing of this case are that the respondents/plaintiffs have filed a suit seeking relief(s) of declaration of title and permanent injunction. In para 2 of the plaint it has been pleaded by the respondents/plaintiffs that the property detailed as Schedule ‘A’ was purchased by late Anokhilal (father of the respondents/plaintiffs and defendant No.2/petitioner No.2 and husband of defendant No.1/petitioner No.1) vide registered sale deed dated 20.10.1984 in the name of his wife (defendant No.1) out of love and affection but entire sale consideration was paid by late Anokhilal. Thus, the respondents/plaintiffs have claimed the right over the said property. Since the suit has been filed in respect of benami transaction, the same is admittedly barred by section 4 of
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.