Lalitaben vs Gordhanbhai Bhaichandbhai

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1987 Supreme(SC) 101

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V. BALAKRISHNA ERADI AND G.L. OZA, JJ.
Lalitaben, Appellant
Versus
Gordhanbhai Bhaichandbhai and another, Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 1776 of 1970, D/- 28-1-1987.

Headnote:
Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 – Section 32M - Amended by Gujarat Act 36 of 1965 - Persuasive arguments advanced before us by learned counsel appearing for appellants court are unable to find any error in reasoning or conclusion of High Court which has taken view that the respondent-tenant is entitled to benefit – Held, This appeal accordingly fails and is dismissed but in circumstances of case court direct parties to bear their respective costs - Appeal Dismissed

Judgement

Notwithstanding the persuasive arguments advanced before us by Smt. J. Wad, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, we are unable to find any error in the reasoning or conclusion of the High Court which has taken the view that the respondent-tenant is entitled to the benefit of S. 32-M of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 as amended by Gujarat Act 36 of 1965. This appeal accordingly fails and is dismissed, but, in the circumstances of the case, we direct the parties to bear their respective costs.

Appeal dismissed.

For Citation AIR 1987 SC 1315= 1987 J.T. 527.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document