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

1990 Supreme(SC) 114

S.C.AGRAWAL, K.JAGANNATHA SHETTY
Delhi Stationers And Printers – Appellant
Versus
Rajendra Kumar – Respondent


Advocates:
Mukul Mudgal, RAJINDER SACHAR, Uma Datta, Y.S.Chitale

JUDMGNET

S.C. AGRAWAL, J.- Special leave granted.

2. The appellant is the tenant of premises consisting of three rooms, a kitchen and a toilet, situated at Jaipur. The respondent (landlord) filed a suit for the eviction of the appellant on the ground of reasonable and .bona fide personal necessity and sub-letting of the premises without his consent. The said suit was decreed by the trial Court on both the grounds. On appeal the suit was dismissed by the Additional District Judge. The High Court, in second appeal, reversed the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge and has passed a decree for eviction against the appellant on the ground that the appellant has sub-let or otherwise parted with the possession of the premises without the consent of the landlord.

3. In the site plan (Ex. A-1) the premises which have been let to the appellant are marked as K. The adjacent room marked as J has been let out by the respondent to Shri Mahendra Singh, the brother-in-law of the appellant. The case of the respondent is that the appellant has sub-let a part of the premises to Mahendra Singh and that he is residing therein. The Additional District Judge has found that Mahendra Singh is









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