Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Nasima Khatoon vs.the State & Anr

Nasima Khatoon vs The State & Anr

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Feb 21, 2018
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1212972

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Decided On
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

Nasima Khatoon

Respondent

The State & Anr

Excerpt

$~26 * in the high court of delhi at new delhi judgment pronounced on:21. 2.2018 + w.p.(c) 1658/2018 & cm no.6824-25/2018 nasima khatoon ........ petitioner through : ms. richa singh, advocate versus the state & anr ........ respondents through : mr. jawahar raja, advocate for r1 and r2. coram:-"hon'ble mr. justice rajiv shakdher % rajiv shakdher, j.(oral) 1. this is a writ petition, whereby, challenge is laid to order dated 28.11.2017, passed by the sdm, seelampur.2. record shows that icici lombard has obtained the impugned attachment order. the attachment order is directed against the son of the petitioner. the petitioner, who is the mother, claims to be the owner of the subject property. the ownership claim is based on a general power of attorney. according to the petitioner, the said power of attorney is registered.3. a perusal of the power of attorney shows that it is executed in favour of the petitioner only to manage, sell, mortgage etcetera, the w.p.(c) 1658/2018 page 1 of2 subject property. there is no reference to any consideration in the power of attorney.4. the claim of the petitioner that she has title and is the owner of the property, prima facie, is not made out.5. writ petition is, accordingly,dismissed.6. the petitioner, however, will have liberty to take recourse to appropriate remedies to establish her title and ownership, albeit, in accordance with law.7. consequently, all pending applications are closed. rajiv shakdher, j february21 2018 c w.p.(c) 1658/2018 page 2 of2

Full Judgment

$~26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment pronounced on:

21. 2.2018 + W.P.(C) 1658/2018 & CM No.6824-25/2018 NASIMA KHATOON ........ Petitioner

Through : Ms. Richa Singh, Advocate versus THE STATE & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS

Through : Mr. Jawahar Raja, Advocate for R1 and R2. CORAM:-

"HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER % RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.

(ORAL) 1. This is a writ petition, whereby, challenge is laid to order dated 28.11.2017, passed by the SDM, Seelampur.

2. Record shows that ICICI Lombard has obtained the impugned attachment order. The attachment order is directed against the son of the petitioner. The petitioner, who is the mother, claims to be the owner of the subject property. The ownership claim is based on a General Power of Attorney. According to the petitioner, the said Power of Attorney is registered.

3. A perusal of the Power of Attorney shows that it is executed in favour of the petitioner only to manage, sell, mortgage etcetera, the W.P.(C) 1658/2018 Page 1 of2 subject property. There is no reference to any consideration in the Power of Attorney.

4. The claim of the petitioner that she has title and is the owner of the property, prima facie, is not made out.

5. Writ Petition is, accordingly,dismissed.

6. The petitioner, however, will have liberty to take recourse to appropriate remedies to establish her title and ownership, albeit, in accordance with law.

7. Consequently, all pending applications are closed. RAJIV SHAKDHER, J FEBRUARY21 2018 c W.P.(C) 1658/2018 Page 2 of2

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial