Kartar Singh Vs. Pooja

Kartar Singh vs Pooja

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Oct 31, 2014

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1171786

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1171786
Court: Delhi High Court
Judge: Sunil Gaur
Decided On: Oct 31, 2014
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Kartar Singh

Advocate Mr. Vijay Ahlawat, Mr. Amit Wahi

Respondent

Pooja

Excerpt

* in the high court of delhi at new delhi date of decision:31. t october, 2014 + cm(m) 962/2014 & c.m.no.17680-81/2014 kartar singh through: ..... petitioner mr. vijay ahlawat & mr. amit wahi, advocates versus pooja ..... respondent through: nemo. coram: hon'ble mr. justice sunil gaur judgment (oral) in this petition, orders of 29th august, 2014 and 30th september, 2014 of the concerned family court are assailed on the ground that in a review petition by the respondent, the allegations of fraud are not required to be gone into and the review petition is not maintainable, as there is no ground to review the judgment of 9th december, 2013 and the review petition is barred by time. upon hearing and on perusal of the aforesaid order, i find this petition to be premature. merely because respondent has been directed to file affidavits, it does not mean that the evidence is to be led on the allegations of fraud. needless to say, the concerned family court shall decide the pending review petition in accordance with the law. cm(m) no.962/2014 page 1 this petition is disposed of with aforesaid observations. pending applications are disposed of as infructuous. (sunil gaur) judge october31 2014 r cm(m) no.962/2014 page 2

Full Judgment

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:

31. t October, 2014 + CM(M) 962/2014 & C.M.No.17680-81/2014 KARTAR SINGH Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Vijay Ahlawat & Mr. Amit Wahi, Advocates Versus POOJA ..... Respondent Through: Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT

(Oral) In this petition, orders of 29th August, 2014 and 30th September, 2014 of the concerned Family Court are assailed on the ground that in a review petition by the respondent, the allegations of fraud are not required to be gone into and the review petition is not maintainable, as there is no ground to review the judgment of 9th December, 2013 and the review petition is barred by time. Upon hearing and on perusal of the aforesaid order, I find this petition to be premature. Merely because respondent has been directed to file affidavits, it does not mean that the evidence is to be led on the allegations of fraud. Needless to say, the concerned family court shall decide the pending review petition in accordance with the law. CM(M) No.962/2014 Page 1 This petition is disposed of with aforesaid observations. Pending applications are disposed of as infructuous. (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE OCTOBER31 2014 r CM(M) No.962/2014 Page 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2014 Same Parties Kartar Singh vs Pooja Same Subject Education Same Judge Sunil Gaur