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

2007 Supreme(SC) 1276

A.K.MATHUR, MARKANDEY KATJU
Sumtibai – Appellant
Versus
Paras Finance Co. Mankanwar W/o Parasmal Chordia (D) – Respondent


judgment

MARKANDEY KATJU, J. —

1.This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 7.1.2000 in S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 835of 1997.

2.Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3.The Revision Petition was filed in the High Court against an order dated 6.8.1997 passed by the trial court whereby the application filed by the revisionists under Order 22 Rule 4(2) CPC read with Order 1 Rule 10 CPC was rejected.

4.The appellants are the legal representatives of late Kapoor Chand. A suit was filed by the respondent herein against Kapoor Chand for specific performance of a contract for sale. It was alleged that Kapoor Chand had entered into an agreement to sell the property in dispute to the plaintiff-respondent, M/s. Paras Finance Co. In that agreement Kapoor Chand stated that the property in dispute was his self acquired property. During the pendency of the suit Kapoor Chand died and his wife, sons etc. applied to be brought on record as legal representatives. After they were impleaded they filed an application under Order 22 Rule 4(2) read with Order 1 Rule 10 CPC praying inter alia, that they should be permitted to file additional written st






























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