SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(SC) 656

BRIJESH KUMAR, D.M.DHARMADHIKARI, D.P.MOHAPATRA
Bharat Sales LTD. – Appellant
Versus
Lakshmi Devi – Respondent


JUDGMENT

 D.P. Mohapatra, J.-Leave is granted.

2. This appeal, filed by the tenants, is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Delhi dated 18th September, 2000 in S.A.O. No. 363 of 1985 dismissing the appeal filed by the appellants herein with certain observations. The operative portion of the judgment is quoted hereunder :

"It was then urged that there is no rationale for the misuser charges demanded by the L&DO. This is really a matter between the L&DO and its lessee.

Moreover, the quantification and apportionment of misuser charges are arithmetical matters of fact. I cannot go into all this in a second appeal. Under the circumstances, there is no option but to dismiss the appeal. The parties will pay the misuser charges in accordance with the order dated 14th August, 1984 passed by the learned Rent Controller. Respondent No. 12, that is, the Union of India through the L&DO should quantify the subsequent misuser charges within a period of two months from today. The appellants should cease and desist from misusing the suit premises with effect from 1st January, 2001, failing which an order of eviction shall be deemed to have been passed against them.

The appeal is dis











































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top