J.S.VERMA, M.N.VENKATACHALIAH, N.D.OJHA
Arjun Khiamal Makhijani: Prithdayal Chetandas – Appellant
Versus
Jamnadas C. Tuliani – Respondent
JUDGMENT
N.D. OJHA, J.
(1) SPECIAL leave granted.
(2) THESE civil appeals have been preferred against a common judgment of the Bombay High court dismissing Writ Petition No. 3313 of 1987 filed by Arjun Khiamal Makhijani who is the appellant in one of these appeals and Writ Petition No. 3417 of 1987 by Prithdayal Chetandas and others who are the appellants in the other civil appeal. Jamnadas C. Tuliani who is respondent 1 in both these appeals is the owner and the landlord of the suit premises comprising two bedrooms flat together with a garage on the ground floor and a store room on Bhulabhai Desai Road in the city of Bombay. A suit was instituted by him for ejectment from the said premises against five defendants on the ground that they were tenants of the said premises and were in arrears of rent for a period of more than six months which they had not paid in spite of a notice of demand having been served on them as contemplated by Ss. (2 of S. 12 of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and were consequently liable for eviction under Ss. (3(a) of the Act as it then stood. Two other grounds were pleaded
S.D.Chaganlal v. Dalichand Virchand Shroff
referred to : Praduman Kumar v. Vlrendra Goyal
Nagindas Ramdas v. Dalpatram Ichharam
relied on : Harbanslal Jagmohandas v. Prabhudas Shivlal
Ganpat Ladha v. Sashikant Vishnu Shinde
Jaywant S.Kulkami v. Minochar,Dosabhai Shroff
distinguished : Vatan Mat v. Kailash Nath
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.