CIT vs. J. H. FINVEST PVT. LTD
ITA/30/2015HC Delhi30 Nov 2015
Bench: The Trial Court) Under Section 96 Of The Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“Cpc”) Against The Judgment & Decree Dated 10Th September, 2014, Passed By The Additional District Judge-17 (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi In Suit Bearing Cs No. 398/2014, Titled As Sunil Kumar Jain & Anr. Versus Ram Kishan Tokas & Anr. (“Impugned Judgment”). 2. The Appellants Had Filed Cs No. 398/2014 Seeking A Decree Towards Recovery Of Firstly, Possession Of The Corner Shop Measuring 15 X 9 Sq. Ft., Situated In Property Bearing No. E-108/2, Opposite Community Centre, Bgn Market, Munirka Village, New Delhi (“Suit Shop”) & Secondly, Rs. 1,00,000/- Towards Damages & Compensation For The Period From 01St July, Digitally Signed By:Hariom Sharma Signing Date:15.12.2025 20:56:25 Signature Not Verified
Section 96
…on v. State of Madras [AIR 1966 SC 1457] in support of his submission that a document not admissible in evidence, though brought on record, has to be excluded from consideration. We 10 (1984) 1 SCC 369. 11 (2003) 8 SCC 752. Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:15.12.2025 20:56:25 Signature Not Verified RFA 30/2015 Page 40 of 43 do not have any dispute with the proposition of law…