Back
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J
Shruti Mayank Shah – Appellant
Versus
Ulltra Lifespace Private Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff purchases property and claims admission of facts. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. plaintiff learns of fraudulent documents regarding the same property. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. defendants acknowledge inability to contest as documents remain unexamined. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. arguments presented by plaintiffs on behalf of their entitlement. (Para 9) |
| 5. defendants argue the transaction validity based on alleged payments. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 6. court identifies competing claims of parties. (Para 12) |
| 7. court assesses the weight of evidence of fraud in property transfer. (Para 14 , 15 , 22) |
| 8. outline of the legal standard for judgment on admissions. (Para 16) |
| 9. clarifies broad judicial discretion under order xii rule 6. (Para 19 , 20) |
| 10. discussion on the implications of admissions from defendant affidavits. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 29) |
| 11. defendants show willingness to rectify their actions. (Para 26) |
| 12. court aims to provide a resolution based on admissions. (Para 30 , 31) |
| 13. court evaluates clear admissions and intentions regarding cancellation. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 14. court directives based on clear admissions lead to judgment. (Para 39 , 40) |
| 15. final judgment granting orders in fav |
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
