Conviction Under Section 409 IPC Postulates Strict Proof Of Entrustment; Suspicion However Grave Cannot Substitute Proof: Supreme Court Criminal Prosecution Emanating From Past Matrimonial Relationship Ought Not To Linger After Divorce: Supreme Court Negligence Of Previous Counsel Not A Ground To Reopen Concluded Pre-Charge Evidence Under Section 311 CrPC: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell Cannot Protect Tenant's Possession Under Section 53A Transfer Of Property Act: Delhi High Court Certified Copies Of Registered Sale Deeds Admissible As Secondary Evidence Without Proving Loss Of Original: Gauhati High Court Counsel Representing Deceased Party Must Inform Court Of Death Under Order XXII Rule 10-A CPC: J&K High Court Son Staying In Father's House Out Of Love And Affection Is A Mere Licensee, Cannot Challenge Father's Title: Delhi High Court Conviction For Murder Cannot Stand Where Single Blow Inflicted In Sudden Fight Without Premeditation: Uttarakhand High Court Inability To Trace Suppliers Or Buyers No Ground For Custodial Interrogation Once Recovery Is Effected: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Assemble Peacefully To Celebrate Association Anniversary Is A Fundamental Right; Unlawful Assembly Per Se Not An Offence: Madras High Court Marriage Photographs Can Be Relied Upon To Estimate Quantity Of Gold Ornaments In Matrimonial Disputes: Kerala High Court POCSO Act Not Confined To Securing Convictions, Soul Of Law Lies In Preserving Childhood Dignity & Healing: Madras High Court Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Accused Languishing In Jail For 9 Years Deserves Bail; Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Violated: Supreme Court Custodial Death | Pendency Of Criminal Trial No Bar For Awarding Compensation Under Public Law Remedy: Gauhati High Court Suit For Possession Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act Barred If Filed Beyond Six Months Of Dispossession: Madras High Court Subsequent Purchaser Is Representative Of Judgment Debtor, Separate Suit Challenging Execution Sale Barred Under Section 47 CPC: Kerala High Court Statutory Bail Restrictions Melt Down When Pre-Trial Detention Is Prolonged & Trial Is Unlikely To Conclude Soon: Delhi High Court Failure To Apprise Accused Of Right Under Section 50 NDPS Act Vitiates Search & Recovery: J&K & Ladakh High Court Section 12(5) Arbitration Act Inapplicable To Proceedings Commenced Before 2015 Amendment; Executing Court Can't Apply Neutrality Norms Retrospectively: Punjab & Haryana High Court Banks Can Share Sale Proceeds Of Secured Assets Outside Liquidation Estate With Homebuyers Under Compromise Agreement: Kerala High Court Election Disputes Must Be Resolved Expeditiously; Long Stays Render Adjudication A Mockery Of Justice: Madras High Court Delhi High Court Suspends LOC, Permits Businessman To Travel Abroad For Healthcare Conferences; Cites Roots In Society & Past Compliance Section 138 NI Act Complaint Not Maintainable By Third Party Who Is Neither Payee Nor Holder In Due Course: Allahabad High Court

Maintaining Status Quo Paramount in Property Disputes: Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Delhi High Court today made a significant observation in the ongoing property dispute case of Madhuri Goel vs Chandra Prakash & Anr., emphasizing the importance of maintaining the status quo in property disputes. The court’s ruling came as a relief to the petitioner, Madhuri Goel, who had challenged the Trial Court’s order directing her to amend her plaint to include the relief of declaration, possession, and consequential relief of injunction.

In the case presided over by Hon’ble Ms. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, the High Court emphasized, “It is essential to respect and maintain the status quo orders in property disputes to ensure justice and prevent illegal dispossession.” This statement came during the hearing of the petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the Trial Court’s decision.

The petitioner, Madhuri Goel, claimed that she was in constructive possession of the disputed property through her tenants as of the date of the institution of the suit. Her counsel argued that despite the Trial Court’s status quo order dated March 8, 2022, the respondents illegally dispossessed the petitioner on March 10, 2022. Subsequently, an application was filed under Section 151 of the CPC for the restoration of possession, which is pending adjudication.

The Delhi High Court acknowledged the merit in the petitioner’s submissions. Justice Arora stated, “The enforcement of the Trial Court’s directives necessitates prior resolution of the Section 151 CPC application.” The court thus kept the operation of the Trial Court’s order dated August 1, 2023, in abeyance, pending the adjudication of the Section 151 CPC application.

The court further directed that, should the application be dismissed, the petitioner would be required to amend her plaint within four weeks to comply with the Trial Court’s directives.

Date of Decision: 8 December 2023

MADHURI GOEL VS CHANDRA PRAKASH & ANR.

 

Latest Legal News