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

2005 Supreme(Bom) 919

ANOOP V.MOHTA
DHRUVAKUMAR HARIBHAU GUJRATHI – Appellant
Versus
DATTATRAYA SHANKAR CHIKHLIKAR – Respondent


Judgment

( 1 ) THE present petitioner tenant has invoked article 227 of Constitution of India and sought to challenge the concurrent finding of facts, given by the Courts below, whereby, the respondent-landlord's suit for possession have been decreed on the ground of arrears of rent.

( 2 ) THE premises in question are Municipal House No. 25, situated at nashik. The tenancy was monthly. The rent was Rs. 11/- plus education cess. As per the respondents, the notice dated 30-3-1983 was issued under certificate of posting. The petitioner-tenant in spite of the receipt of the notice failed to comply the same and therefore, the suit for possession was filed by the respondent in the court of Jt. Civil Judge, J. D. Nashik (trial Court ). The said suit was resisted by the defendant by filing written statement and additional written statement. The evidence was led by the parties. The respondent examined himself. No postman was examined in the matter. The learned Judge after perusal of the material placed on the record granted the decree for possession. The Additional District judge, Nashik (Appellate Court) after considering the rival contentions between the parties, rejected the appeal. Ther










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