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

2006 Supreme(Bom) 468

D.D.SINHA
SHAILESH s/o SUDHIR JOGLEKAR – Appellant
Versus
NIRMAL KUMAR s/o GULZARILAL JAIN – Respondent


ORAL JUDGMENT : - Heard Mr. Bhangde, learned counsel for the Applicant. Respondent though served, none appeared for the Respondent.

2. Civil Revision Application is directed against the judgment and order dated 26th February, 1999, passed by the Additional Chief Judge, Small Cause Court, Nagpur, whereby the application moved by the Respondent/non - applicant under Order 9, Rule 13 and under section 144 of Code of Civil Procedure is allowed and ex parte decree passed in Civil Suit No. 558/91 was set aside. Similarly, against the appellate order dated 12 - 6 - 2001 passed by the Additional District Judge, Nagpur, whereby the appeal filed by the applicant came to be dismissed.

2 - A. Mr. Bhangde, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is the original landlord and the non - applicant was the tenant in the suit premises i.e. shop block No.3, bearing House No. 293 situated at West High Court Road, Dharampeth, Nagpur. The applicant/landlord on 5 - 12 - 1990 filed application before the Rent Controller under Clause 13(3)(iii) and (v) of the C. P. and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949. On the basis of the said application, the














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