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

1984 Supreme(Kar) 260

KULKARNI
RAMAKRISHNA AITHAL – Appellant
Versus
VARADAPPA – Respondent


KULKARNI, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a revision by the Judgment-debtor (Jdr.) against the order dated 11-1-984 passed by the ixth Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore City in execution case No. 3656 of 1983 holding that the execution Petition is maintainable and that the Court has got jurisdiction to execute the decree.

( 2 ) THE Jdr. filed an eviction Petition in HRC Case No. 355/68 in the Court of the I Munsiff, bangalore City for recovering possession under Section 21 (1) (j ). It was dis-missed by the Trial court. Then the matter was taken up by the landlord to the District Judge in HRC Appeal No. 23/1974. The District Judge allowed the appeal and ordered the eviction under Section 21 (1) (j ). The tenant approached this Court in CRP 774 of 1976. In CRP 774/1976, they entered into a compromise. On 25-7-1980, a decree in terms of the compromise was ordered to be drawn up, by this Court.

( 3 ) AFTER the compromise decree was drawn up, the land-lord obtained a sanctioned plan. It is undisputed that he has put up a cellar and a row of four shops and a first floor on the said four shops after demolishing a portion of the building. It is undisputed that the landlord is still k































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