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

1993 Supreme(SC) 517

A.M.AHMADI, S.MOHAN
Prithvichand Ramchand Sablok – Appellant
Versus
S. Y. Shinde – Respondent


Advocates:
A.S.BHASME, R.KARANJAWALA, RAJESH SHARMA, S.B.Bhasme, SURUCHI AGARWAL, V.M.TARKUNDE

JUDGMENT

AHMADI, J.:—Special leave granted.

2. The appellant, landlord, filed an eviction suit No. 419 of 1968 for possession of the demised premises mainly on the ground of arrears of rent under Section 12(3) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act). That suit was settled between the parties, the relevant terms whereof read as under :

(1) The possession of the suit premises is to be given by the defendant to the plaintiff by 10th October, 1970. If the defendant does not give possession, then the plaintiff is to take possession by execution on the basis of this decree.

(2) *** *** ***

(3) The defendant is given a concession that if the defendant paid the entire amount mentioned in clause(2) above, i.e., the amount involved in the suit, future mesne profits, electricity charges, water charges, the rent of the godown, expenses of the suit by 10th October, 1970, the plaintiff will not execute the decree for possession."

Under clauses (2) and (4) of the compromise terms the rent in respect of the suit premises was to be calculated on the basis of standard rent of Rs. 30/- per month, the rent of the store room (godown) was to be calcul



























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