Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DINESH CHANDRA versus RAJEEV VERMA AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Dinesh Chandra v. Rajeev Verma And Others - WRIT - C No. 36477 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 11405 (13 July 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

     Court No. 24

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.   36477  of 2006

Dinesh Chandra ......................  ........Petitioner.

Vs.

Sri Rajeev Verma & others        ......... Respondents.

***

Hon'ble B.A. Zaidi, J.

1. Heard Sri Vijai Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners in this writ petition, who happens to be the defendant no. 2 in Original Suit No. 567 of 2001  ( Rajeev Sharma and others Vs. Smt. Shankari Devi and others).

2. As will appear from the record, she has moved an application before the Trial Judge i.e. 6th Addl. Civil Judge ( Jr. Div.), meerut  in the afore noted suit with a prayer that the Defendant Smt. Nirmala Devi  be directed to produce the original Will,  which was in her possession. The learned Civil Judge, Meerut  dismissed  the application saying that it was not necessary at this stage, holding the application thus pre-mature. The respondent no. 2 challenged this order before the Revisional Court by means of filing Revision No. 61 of 2005.

3. The grouse of the petitioner is that initially the Revisional Court admitted  the Revision after hearing both the parties   but ultimately dismissed the revision  as being not maintainable  and that is how this writ petition.

4. Without addressing  to the issue of the maintainability, after perusing the entire record, I find the writ petition merit-less. As will appear there was no stage at present for calling upon the defendant Nirmala Devi  to file the Will if she did possessit,  which has also been held by the Trial Civil Judge. Once  issues are framed or when Smt. Nirmala Devi enters  the witness box, this question may  arise. At this stage, this controversy  being  premature  must be scuttled  down at the threshold

5. Writ  dismissed.

Dt: 13.7.2006

n.u.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.