R. M. LODHA, SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, DIPAK MISRA
SHAHA RATANSI KHIMJI – Appellant
Versus
PROPOSED KUMBHAR SONS HOTEL P. LTD. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, J.
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 18th July, 2006 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Second Appeal No. 109 of 2006. By the impugned judgment, the High Court affirmed the concurrent finding of the lower courts that the appellant's tenancy right had lapsed and dismissed the second appeal.
2. When the matter came before this Court, vide order dated 5th January, 2007, this Court referred the matter to a Bench of three Judges. The said order reads as under: "Apparently there seems to be inconsistency in the view taken by this Court in Vannattankandy Ibrayi Vs. Kunhabdulla Hajee [(2001) 1 SCC 564] and T.Lakshmipathi & Ors. Vs. R.Nithyananda Reddy & Ors. [(2003) 5 SCC 150].
Leave granted.
The matter shall be placed before a three Judge Bench.
Status quo shall be maintained in the meanwhile."
3. In the case of Vannattankandy Ibrayi Vs. Kunhabdulla Hajee, (2001) 1 SCC 564, this Court formulated two questions for consideration: "
(a) Whether the tenancy in respect of the premises governed by the Kerala Buildings
Vannattankandy Ibrayi v. Kunhabdulla Hajee
T.Lakshmipathi v. R.Nithyananda Reddy
Hind Rubber Industries (P) Ltd. v. Tayebhai Mohammedbhai Bagasarwalla
Raja Dhruv Dev Chand v. Harmohinder Singh
D.G. Gose & Co. (Agents) (P) Ltd. v. State of Kerala
Corpn. of the city of Victoria v. Bishop of Vancouver Island
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.