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

1929 Supreme(SC) 108

SIR LANCELOT SANDERSON, SIR JOHN WALLIS, LORD ATKIN
HUNSRAJ – Appellant
Versus
BEJOY LAL SEAL – Respondent


Advocates:
Solicitors for appellants:W. W. Box & Co. Solicitors for respondents: Watkins & Hunter.

Judgement

Appeal (No. 107 of 1928) from a decree of the High Court in its appellate jurisdiction (November 25, 1927) reversing a decree of the Court in its original civil jurisdiction (April 14, 1927).

On August 23, 1910, the predecessor in interest to respondents Nos. 1-5 executed in favour of a lessee represented by respondents Nos. 6 and 7 a building lease of immovable property in Calcutta for a term of sixty-one years. The lease contained covenants, fully set out in the judgment of the Judicial Committee, by which the lessee had liberty, without obtaining the lessors consent, to underlet the premises and the buildings to be erected ; and the lessee had no power (subject to an immaterial exception) to assign, transfer, or alienate his right, title, and interest in the demised premises. The lease further provided by clause 10 that if any breach should be made by the lessee in any of the covenants and agreements on his part to be observed, it should be lawful for the lessor to re-enter upon the demised premises as if the lease had never been executed.

On May 7, 1923, the respondents Nos. 6 and 7 executed in favour of the appellants predecessor in title a mortgage of property inclu






















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