KANWAL ARORA Vs. PREM CHAND KHANEJA
LAWS(DLH)-2013-5-605
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on May 23,2013

Kanwal Arora Appellant
VERSUS
Prem Chand Khaneja Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

NANAK VS. AHMAD ALI [REFERRED TO]
MADRAS AND KERALA IN A. THAVAMMAL VS. KALADEVI [REFERRED TO]
I T C LIMITED VS. DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [REFERRED TO]
LIVERPOOL AND LONDON S P AND I ASSOCIATION LIMITED VS. M V SEA SUCCESS [REFERRED TO]
CHIRANJILAL VS. BHAGWAN DASS [REFERRED TO]
DINESH KUMARI MISHRA VS. RANJANA MISHRA [REFERRED TO]
P.P.A. IMPEX PVT. LTD. VS. MANGAL SAIN MITTAL [REFERRED TO]
GEORGE C.S. VS. MARIAMMA CHAMPAKASSERIL [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J. - (1.)ON the previous date of 22nd April, 2013, the following order was made in the suit: -
1. The suit is ripe for framing of issues.

(2.)NEITHER counsels have submitted proposed issues.
However, the counsel for the plaintiff states that no issue arises. He states that the present suit is for partition of an immovable property admittedly in the name of the plaintiff and the defendant, and the only defense of the defendant is that the entire purchase consideration had flown from the defendant and the plaintiff has not contributed any part of the sale consideration inspite of promise to do so and upon the plaintiff having failed to pay the purchase consideration, had agreed to the defendant alone being the owner of the property.

(3.)IT has been enquired from the counsel for the defendant whether the aforesaid amounts to a defense in law. He has not been able to argue.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.