HAWA SINGH vs RANDHIR SINGH RANA — 587/2017
Case under Possession and Permanent Injuction Section 79. Status: Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence. Next hearing: 16th July 2026.
CS - CIVIL SUIT FOR DJ and ADJ
CNR: DLND010068752017
Next Hearing
16th July 2026
Filing Number
5477/2017
Filing Date
18-05-2017
Registration No
587/2017
Registration Date
19-05-2017
Court
District and Sessions Judge,New Delhi, PHC
Judge
13-District Judge-03
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
HAWA SINGH
Respondent(s)
RANDHIR SINGH RANA
Hearing History
Judge: 13-District Judge-03
Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence
Order
Misc. Arguments
Misc. Arguments
Misc. Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-03-2026 | Plaintiff/Petitioner Evidence |
| 13-03-2026 | Order |
| 01-11-2025 | Misc. Arguments |
| 03-05-2025 | Misc. Arguments |
| 16-01-2025 | Misc. Arguments |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: CS 587/2017 — Hawa Singh v. Randhir Singh & Anr. The plaintiff's legal representatives filed an application under Order 7 Rule 14 of CPC seeking permission to file additional documents (sale deeds to 18 prospective buyers and personal documents like Ration Card and savings account) after the suit was filed, citing the plaintiff's old age and delayed procurement. The court dismissed the application, finding the plaintiff's explanation unsatisfactory regarding why documents allegedly in his possession since inception were not filed with the original suit, and rejecting arguments that documents relating to other land sales were relevant to the disputed property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: CS 587/2017 — Hawa Singh v. Randhir Singh & Anr. The plaintiff's legal representatives filed an application under Order 7 Rule 14 of CPC seeking permission to file additional documents (sale deeds to 18 prospective buyers and personal documents like Ration Card and savings account) after the suit was filed, citing the plaintiff's old age and delayed procurement. The court dismissed the application, finding the plaintiff's explanation unsatisfactory regarding why documents allegedly in his possession since inception were not filed with the original suit, and rejecting arguments that documents relating to other land sales were relevant to the disputed property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts