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

1994 Supreme(SC) 574

M.K.MUKHERJEE, S.MOHAN
Nihal Chand Rameshwar Dass – Appellant
Versus
Vinod Rastogi – Respondent


Advocates:
K.V.MOHAN, M.G.RAMA CHANDRA RAO, P.NAGESH, RAJINDER SACHAR, Uma Datta

Judgment

M.K. MUKHERJEE, J.- The tenants in a suit for eviction are the appellants before us. Though the landlord-respondent sought eviction of the tenants on various grounds the only ground which survives for our consideration in this appeal is of illegal subletting. According to the landlord the tenants had without his consent sublet the verandah of the tenanted premises to certain individuals, namely, Zinda Hasan, Abdul Rashid and Dhunna, who were doing business there. The defence of the tenants, so far as this ground was concerned, was one of denial.

2. The trial court answered all the issues regarding the grounds of eviction against the landlord and dismissed the suit. In appeal the first appellate court, however, on an exhaustive analysis of the evidence adduced during trial, reached a conclusion to the contrary so far as the issue of subletting was concerned and decreed the suit. The High Court dismissed the second appeal preferred by the tenant affirming the factual findings recorded by the first appellate court. Hence this appeal by special leave.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants first submitted that both the appellate courts failed to consider that in ord






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