Raj Kumar Sharma vs.dal Chand

Raj Kumar Sharma vs Dal Chand

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Mar 17, 2017

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1204932

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/1204932
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Mar 17, 2017
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Raj Kumar Sharma

Respondent

Dal Chand

Excerpt

$~10 * + 1. in the high court of delhi at new delhi rfa6912016 & cm334382016 raj kumar sharma through : appellant in person. ..... appellant versus dal chand through : none. ..... respondent coram: hon'ble ms. justice hima kohli % the appellant, who appears in person, states that he has been able to order1703.2017 negotiate a settlement with the respondent during the pendency of the appeal. he therefore does not wish to press the appeal as he states that he has already paid a sum of rs.1.22 lacs to the respondent before the trial court, in full and final settlement of all his claims, subject matter of the impugned judgment.2. leave, as prayed for, is granted. the appeal is disposed of along with the pending application. hima kohli, j march17 2017 sk

Full Judgment

$~10 * + 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI RFA6912016 & CM334382016 RAJ KUMAR SHARMA Through : Appellant in person. ..... Appellant versus DAL CHAND Through : None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % The appellant, who appears in person, states that he has been able to ORDER

1703.2017 negotiate a settlement with the respondent during the pendency of the appeal. He therefore does not wish to press the appeal as he states that he has already paid a sum of Rs.1.22 lacs to the respondent before the trial court, in full and final settlement of all his claims, subject matter of the impugned judgment.

2. Leave, as prayed for, is granted. The appeal is disposed of along with the pending application. HIMA KOHLI, J MARCH17 2017 sk

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2017 Same Parties Raj Kumar Sharma vs Dal Chand Same Subject Land Acquisition