JAKESH KUMAR vs JAGDISH RAJ AND OTHERS — 888/2022

Case under Specific Performance of Contracts Section 1. Status: Order. Next hearing: 24th August 2026.

Order Next hearing 24-Aug-2026

CS DJ ADJ - CIVIL SUIT FOR DJ ADJ

CNR: DLSW010095532022

Filing Number

4086/2022

Filing Date

13-Sep-2022

Registration No

888/2022

Registration Date

14-Sep-2022

Court

District and Session Judge, South-West DWK

Judge

437-District Judge

Last updated 10-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Specific Performance of Contracts Section 1
Possession Section 2
Suit for Declaration Section 3
Injunctions-both Permanent and Mandatory Section 4

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.JAKESH KUMAR

    Adv. SANJEEV CHAUHAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.JAGDISH RAJ AND OTHERS

  2. 2.SUMAN ARYA

  3. 3.SUNIL VERMA

  4. 4.DEVINDER KUMAR

  5. 5.KEWALKRISHAN

  6. 6.VISHAL CHAWLA

  7. 7.SH. BHUPINDER KUMAR VERMA

  8. 8.SUSHMA

Case History

  1. 24-Aug-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 11-May-2026

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

    Case 888/2022 Summary JAKESH KUMAR v. JAGDISH RAJ AND OTHERS Defendants 4-8's application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC to reject the plaint was dismissed. The court found the plaint discloses a valid cause of action: Jakesh Kumar entered a registered agreement to sell in 2005 for a DDA flat in Bindapur, paid Rs.60,000, and was put in possession until 2019 when defendants dispossessed him. The court rejected arguments regarding limitation, missing site plan, and lack of cause of action as premature, holding these are mixed questions of law and fact to be determined at trial. Case adjourned to 24.08.2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 11-May-2026

    Order

    District Judge

  4. 09-Apr-2026

    Order

    District Judge

  5. 14-Mar-2026

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

  6. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    District Judge

  7. 02-Mar-2026

    Misc. Arguments

    District Judge

  8. 15-Dec-2025

    Misc. Arguments

    District Judge

  9. 18-Sep-2025

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

  10. 18-Sep-2025

    Misc. Arguments

    District Judge

  11. 22-Aug-2025

    Copy Of OrderView PDF

  12. 22-Aug-2025

    Order

    District Judge

  13. 01-Aug-2025

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  14. 01-Aug-2025

    Order

    District Judge

  15. 30-Jul-2025

    Misc. cases/purpose

    District Judge

  16. 04-Jun-2025

    Misc. Arguments

    District Judge

  17. 24-Mar-2025

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  18. 24-Mar-2025

    Misc. Arguments

    District Judge

  19. 13-Jan-2025

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  20. 13-Jan-2025

    Misc. Arguments

    District Judge

  21. 30-Sep-2024

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  22. 30-Sep-2024

    Misc. Arguments

    District Judge

  23. 08-Jul-2024

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  24. 08-Jul-2024

    Misc. Arguments

    District Judge

  25. 18-Mar-2024

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  26. 18-Mar-2024

    Misc. Arguments

    District Judge

  27. 09-Dec-2023

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  28. 09-Dec-2023

    Misc. cases/purpose

    District Judge

  29. 11-Sep-2023

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  30. 11-Sep-2023

    Misc. cases/purpose

    District Judge

  31. 03-Jul-2023

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  32. 03-Jul-2023

    Misc. cases/purpose

    District Judge

  33. 27-Mar-2023

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  34. 27-Mar-2023

    Misc. cases/purpose

    District Judge

  35. 15-Dec-2022

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  36. 15-Dec-2022

    Misc. cases/purpose

    District Judge

  37. 14-Sep-2022

    Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF

  38. 14-Sep-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  39. 13-Sep-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. 888/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Case 888/2022 Summary JAKESH KUMAR v. JAGDISH RAJ AND OTHERS Defendants 4-8's application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC to reject the plaint was dismissed. The court found the plaint discloses a valid cause of action: Jakesh Kumar entered a registered agreement to sell in 2005 for a DDA flat in Bindapur, paid Rs.60,000, and was put in possession until 2019 when defendants dispossessed him. The court rejected arguments regarding limitation, missing site plan, and lack of cause of action as premature, holding these are mixed questions of law and fact to be determined at trial. Case adjourned to 24.08.2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case