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

RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
Pooja Soni – Appellant
Versus
Dinesh Kumar – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Shri Ashish Shroti, Advocate
For the Respondents:Shri Satyam Agrawal, Advocate

ORDER

Rajendra Kumar (Verma), J.—Regard being had to the similitude of the facts and controversy in question, this petition is heard analogously along with M.P.No.601/2021 and a common order is being passed which covers the fate of both the petitions as referred above. For conveniences sake, facts of the case narrated in M.P.No.600/2021 are taken into consideration.

2. By the instant petition, the petitioner has called in question the legality and validity of the order dated 28.06.2018, Annexure P/4 passed by the Court of First Civil Judge Class-I, Nasrullagang, District Sehore, whereby an application filed under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the petitioner/defendant No.3 has been rejected.

3. As per the petitioner/defendant No.3, she is the owner and in possession of the property consisting of agricultural land bearing survey Nos.272/1/2/2, 273 & 354/273 situated at village Cheech, Tahsil Nasrullaganj, District Sehore (hereinafter referred to as ‘the suit property’) purchased by her out of her stridhan and as a mark of respect, she got mutated the name of her husband (respondent No.2/defendant No.1) in the revenue record. The respondent No.2 borrowed Rs.2.00 lacs fr

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