V. BALAKRISHNA ERADI, Y. V. CHANDRACHUD
Hari Kishan Gupta: Lala Datta Ram – Appellant
Versus
Mool Chand: Hari Kishan Gupta – Respondent
ORDER
1. Special leave granted.
2. Datta Ram, the tenant was to hand over possession of portion of the premises to the landlord, under the Orders passed by this Court. One Mool Chand, claiming to be Datta Rams partner, has file, a suit (O. S. No. 152 of 1981) contending that he cannot be evicted in execution of the Order passed by this Court. His contention, now, appears to be that he is in possession of the premises as a tenant. The trial court had granted an interim induction in his favour on May 15, 1981 and has confirmed it on May 19,1 981.
3. This appeal is directed against the aforesaid order of injunction. The landlord has also filed a petition under the Contempt of Courts Act, praying that appropriate action be taken against the original tenant for not complying with this Courts Order asking him to hand over possession of the premises. Repeated attempts have been made by this Court to serve notice of these proceedings on Mool Chand. It is obvious that he is evading service.
4. In these circumstances, we are left with no alternative except to vacate the order of interim injection passed by the learned Trial Judge and to direct that the Order passed by this Court for handing
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.