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

ARUN BHANSALI
Dinesh Jain – Appellant
Versus
Jitendra Pandya – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners:Dr. Sachin Acharya, Advocate
For the Respondents:Mr. Manish Shishodia, Advocate

ORDER

Arun Bhansali, J.—This revision petition is directed against the order dated 16.08.2016 passed by the Additional District Judge No.2, Udaipur (‘the trial court’), whereby the application filed by the petitioners-defendants under Order VII, Rule 11 CPC read with Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (‘the Act’), has been rejected.

2. The plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration of gift-deed dated 27.05.2015 as null & void and for permanent injunction. It was, inter alia, claimed in the plaint that the gift-deed in question was executed by defendant No.6 - Pratap Singh Rathore claiming himself to be the Sanrakshak of Vanvasi Sewa Sangh in favour of Municipal Corporation, Udaipur for a piece of land admeasuring 11000 sq. feet. It was, inter alia, claimed that the Vanvasi Sewa Sangh was no more in existence as the same came to be merged with Rajasthan Sewa Sangh, which is a Society registered under the provisions of Societies Registration Act having possession and ownership of the land in question. Based on the said averments, relief was claimed that the gift-deed be declared null & void qua the rights of the plaintiffs and permanent injunction be granted that no construction
































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