PRADEEP KHULLAR Vs. PADMAWATI KHULLAR
LAWS(DLH)-2013-11-269
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on November 11,2013

Pradeep Khullar Appellant
VERSUS
Padmawati Khullar Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

RAMESHWAR SHARMA VS. SURJU PRASAD [REFERRED TO. 11.]
SUBHAS CHANDRA AGARWALLA VS. GOLABI DEVI AGARWALLA [REFERRED TO]
NALAJALA NARASAYYA VS. NALAJALA SITAYYA [REFERRED TO. 8.]
KHADI KISAN VS. THUBRA KISEN [REFERRED TO. 6.]
AYYASAMI GOUNDER VS. T S PALANISAMI [REFERRED TO. 4.]
N C KALADHARAN VS. KAMALESWARAN [REFERRED TO. 7.]
RAMASAMY GOUNDER VS. MUTHAYAMMAL [REFERRED TO. 10.]
SANJAY NARAYANRAO BARDE VS. SAU VIMAL KESHAORAO BAIRAM [REFERRED TO. 12.]
ARYA VYASYS SAMAJAM VS. R MURALI [REFERRED TO. 3.]
PRAVESH KUMARI VS. RISHI PRASAD [REFERRED TO. 9.]
GURMALI CHAND VS. ASHOK VERMA [REFERRED TO. 5.]
SHAKUNTALA DEVI VS. NATHU LAL JAIN [REFERRED TO. 13.]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)THIS is an application under Order XVIII Rule 3 and 3 A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) filed by the Plaintiff for permission to the Plaintiff to file his affidavit by way of an examination -in -chief and to be cross - examined.
(2.)THE background to this application is that the aforementioned suit has been filed by the Plaintiff for mandatory and permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from interfering in the Plaintiffs administration of the business of M/s Shalimar Fruit Products at B -50, Lawrence Road Industrial Area, Delhi.
Inter alia, the following issues were framed on the basis of the pleadings of the parties on 10th Jury 2007:

"1.Whether the alleged codicil dated 5.5.1986 was executed by late Shri Krishan Lal Khullar? OPP 2. If issue No.1 is answered in favour of the plaintiff, in what manner are the rights of the parties under the. Will dated 4.5.1986 affected by it? OPP 3Whether the plaintiff is entitled to run and administer the business of M/s. Shalimar Fruit Products in terms of the Will and alleged codicil? OPP 4. Whether the rights conferred on defendant No.1 under the Will dated 4.5.1986 give absolute rights to defendant No.1 under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act? OPD -1 5. Relief.

(3.)THE Court directed the parties to file their respective list of witnesses and additional documents within fifteen days. Further, the Plaintiff was directed to file the affidavits of examinatjon -in -chief of his witnesses within six weeks. The evidence was directed to be recorded by the Joint Registrar (JR).


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