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

2003 Supreme(SC) 978

SHIVARAJ V.PATIL, D.M.DHARMADHIKARI
Mangat Singh Trilochan Singh – Appellant
Versus
Satpal – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Dharmadhikari, J.-The High Court by the orders impugned in these appeals has reversed the judgment of trial court and defence of the petitioners - tenants in each of the cases has been struck off on the alleged ground of non-deposit of arrears of rent within the specified period in accordance with provisions of Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure [hereinafter referred to as the Code].

2. The trial court by separate orders passed in each of the cases had rejected the prayer of the landlords for striking off the defence and allowed the applications of the appellants - tenants seeking permission to deposit the arrears of rent.

3. Learned senior counsel Shri G.L. Sanghi appearing for the appellants - tenants has brought to our notice the contents of the summons served by the trial court on the tenants after the institution of the suit for eviction against them. Relying on the contents of the summons, the submission made is that only a date of appearance of the parties was intimated and it was not a date fixed for hearing of the suit. It is further submitted that since the date mentioned in the summons was not the date for hearing of the parties in the suit, the per

























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