PARVESH KUMAR vs PINKI — 284/2025

Case under Suit for Declaration Section EVICTION. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED on 23rd May 2026.

Case disposed

CS - CIVIL SUIT FOR DJ ADJ

CNR: DLNE010022312025

e-Filing Number

31-07-2025

Filing Number

1173/2025

Filing Date

31-Jul-2025

Registration No

284/2025

Registration Date

04-Aug-2025

Court

District and Sessions Judge, North-East, KKD

Judge

429-District Judge

Decision Date

23-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Suit for Declaration Section EVICTION

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PARVESH KUMAR

    Adv. Himanshu Detwal

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.PINKI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-May-2026

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

    The court dismissed plaintiff Parvesh Kumar's suit for possession of the property on two grounds: (1) a General Power of Attorney cannot convey property ownership, so his claimed title based on a 2017 GPA is invalid; and (2) defendant Pinki is the registered owner through a sale deed executed pursuant to a binding 2024 specific performance judgment against the plaintiff, which he failed to challenge. The court held the plaintiff has no legal right to recover possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 23-May-2026

    Disposed

    District Judge

  4. 15-Apr-2026

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

  5. 15-Apr-2026

    Misc./ Arguments

    District Judge

  6. 13-Mar-2026

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

  7. 13-Mar-2026

    Misc. cases

    District Judge

  8. 23-Jan-2026

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

  9. 23-Jan-2026

    Misc. cases

    District Judge

  10. 12-Nov-2025

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

  11. 12-Nov-2025

    Misc. cases

    District Judge

  12. 06-Aug-2025

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

  13. 06-Aug-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  14. 31-Jul-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 284/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed plaintiff Parvesh Kumar's suit for possession of the property on two grounds: (1) a General Power of Attorney cannot convey property ownership, so his claimed title based on a 2017 GPA is invalid; and (2) defendant Pinki is the registered owner through a sale deed executed pursuant to a binding 2024 specific performance judgment against the plaintiff, which he failed to challenge. The court held the plaintiff has no legal right to recover possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case