A.K.SHRIVASTAVA
Ashok Kumar Gehani – Appellant
Versus
Ramhet Agrawal – Respondent
1. This revision petition has been directed against the impugned order passed by learned trial Court, dismissing the application under Order 7 Rule 11, CPC filed by petitioners/defendants.
2. Instant suit has been filed by plaintiff/respondent No. 1 for declaration that the sale-deed dated 7.5.2004 which was registered on 21.5.2004, is null and void. The other relief which has been prayed by the plaintiff is for permanent injunction that on suit property defendants may not raise any construction. According to the plaint averments, in the sale-deed dated 7/21 May, 2004, plaintiff is not a party. Shri Aradhe, learned senior counsel for petitioners/defendants also admits that plaintiff is not the party in the said sale-deed.
3. On going through the averments made in the plaint, it is gathered that the sale-deed was executed by defendant No.3 in favour of defendants No.1 and 2, but plaintiff is not the party in the said deed. Ramhet Agrawal who is plaintiff is also not deriving or claiming any right, title and interest from Bhagwandas Agrawal, defendant No. 3 who sold the property to defendants No.1 and 2. Thus, I am of the view that since plaintiff is not a party in the sale-deed a
1. Santosh Chandra and others v. Cyan Sunder Bai and others = [1970 JLJ 290]
4. Shamsher Singh v. Rajinder Prasad = [AIR 1973 SC 2384]
2. Pratap and another v. Punia Bai and others = [1976 JLJ 703]
3. Raj Kaur w/o Garumukh Singh Randhawa v. M/s. Kinetic Gallery and another = [2000 (I) JLJ 67
6. Nainsukh Kishandas and others v. State. Manish Choudhari and others = [1998 (2) MPLJ 79]
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.