S.MURALIDHAR
Anand J. Datwani – Appellant
Versus
Geeti Bhagat Datwani – Respondent
Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.—This is an application under Order VII Rule CPC filed by Defendant No.1 seeking rejection of the plaint.
2. The above suit has been filed by Mr. Anand Datwani against his wife, Mrs. Geeti Bhagat Datwani and her parents, Mr. Manmohan Bhagat and Mrs. Sumohini Bhagat, Defendants 2 and 3 for partition, declaration and permanent injunction.The Plaintiff seeks partitioning of the property, including the land and building, at 32, Shivji Marg, Westend Greens, Rangpuri, New Delhi (‘the suit property’) in equal shares between the Plaintiff and Defendant No.1 and a declaration that the undertaking given by him on 29th April 2004 is null and void. The Plaintiff also seeks a permanent injunction to restrain the Defendants from dealing with the suit property.
3. The Plaintiff and Defendant No.1 were married on 13th October 1994. A daughter and a son were born on 4th August 1996 and 20th December 1999 respectively. The Plaintiff states that sometime in 1995-96, Defendant No.1, after consulting Defendants 2 and 3, expressed her desire to develop the land at 32, Rangpuri and requested the Plaintiff to provide the finances. According to the Plaintiff, it was mutually ag
Ashish Kumar Hazara v. Rubi Park Cooperative Society
Ashok Khurana v. Steelman Industries
Rajkishore Mohanty v. Kangali Moharan
S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath
Mayar (H.K.) Ltd. v. Owners & Parties, Vessel MV Fortune Express
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.