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

2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 36654

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Neeta Tiwari – Appellant
Versus
Jitendra Kumar Tiwari – Respondent


Advocates:
Ankit Saxena,

ORDER

Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that respondent No.2- Shanti Sharma has already expired and her name has already been deleted from the cause title of the suit by order dated 23.03.2021.

2. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner prays for deletion of name of respondent No.2 from the cause title of present petition. 3. Prayer is allowed. 4. Necessary correction be made during the course of the day.

5. By the present petition, petitioner has challenged the order dated 07.02.2024 passed in RCSA No. 79/2019 by Second Civil Judge, Senior Division District-Umariya, whereby the application moved by petitioner under 14 Rule 5 of CPC was dismissed.

6. The short facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a suit for declaration and injunction against the defendants claiming that Late Shri Mukutdhari Sharma and Smt. Shanti Sharma adopted the petitioner during the lifetime of Shri Mukutdhari and, therefore, the petitioner is adopted daughter of the spouse. Respondent/Defendant No.1 Smt. Shanti Sharma sold the subjected property through registered sale deed to respondent/defendant No.1 Jitendra Kumar Tiwari and the sale deed is challenged by petit

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