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

2002 Supreme(Bom) 368

D.D.SINHA
Ramesh Ramaji Akre & others – Appellant
Versus
Mangalabai Pralhad Akre & others – Respondent


JUDGMENT - D.D. SINHA, J.:---Heard Shri Gharote, learned Counsel for the applicants, and Shri Shukla, learned Counsel for the non-applicants.

2. The revision is directed against the order dated 15-3-1995 passed by the 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nagpur below Exhibit 1 in Regular Darkhast No. 25/1995 whereby Executing Court issued warrant of possession against the present applicants (original plaintiffs) under Order XXI, Rule 32(1) read with Order XXXIX, Rule 2(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The relevant facts, which have given rise to the controversy in issue, are as follows:

3. The applicants filed regular civil suit bearing No. 2262/1992 against the Corporation of City of Nagpur and deceased Pralhad Ramaji Akre, husband of non-applicant No. 1 and father of non-applicant Nos. 2 to 4. It was pleaded by the applicants in the suit that they were in possession of shop No. 26 situated at Fuloli, Itwari, Nagpur and were doing business of sale of flowers in the said premises since long. The said shop was taken on lease by Ramaji Akre, who was father of applicant Nos. 1 and 2 and husband of applicant No. 3 sometime in the year 1932 and since then Ramaji Akre was conducting







































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