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

1991 Supreme(Bom) 360

P.S.PATANKAR
Varisalli Mohammed Ilias – Appellant
Versus
Abdul Sattar Gulam Hussein (since deceased by his heirs) and others – Respondent


JUDGMENT - P.S. PATANKAR, J.:---The question that arises for my consideration in this appeal is whether the appellant is protected under section 15-A of the Bombay Rents, Hotel Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter called Bombay Rent Act)? If protected then admittedly the Civil Court will be having no jurisdiction to decide the suit.

2. A few facts are as follows.

3. There is one Hair Cutting Saloon by name 'Bombay Hair Dressers' situated at 110/2, Shivaji Nagar, in the City of Pune. The structure belonged to one Smt. N.K. Jangi. One shop premises out of it was originally leased out to the father of the plaintiff who was carrying on hair cutting business in the name of 'Bombay Hair Dressers'. Sometime in 1962, the same was given to the defendant No. 1 and the defendant No. 1 went on carrying on the said business till his death and then it is carried on by defendant No. 4. Defendant Nos. 2 to 4 are sons of defendant No. 1.

4. The plaintiff filed special civil suit in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Pune, for getting possession of the suit premises on the ground that the shop was given to defendant No. 1, as licensee for conducting at the rate of Rs. 200/- per
































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