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

2007 Supreme(Bom) 919

V.K.TAHILRAMANI, S.RADHAKRISHNAN, D.B.BHOSALE
Prabhudas Damodar Kotecha – Appellant
Versus
Manharbala Jeram Damodar – Respondent


JUDGMENT: (PER D.B.BHOSALE, J.)

1. The order of reference dated 16.1.2006, which has occasioned the constitution of this Full Bench, has been passed by the learned Single Judge in view of a divergence of the views of the Division Benches of this court, the first being in Ramesh Dwarkadas Mehra Vs. Indravati Dwarkadas Mehra, 2001(3) ALL MR 668 and the second in Letters Patent Appeal No.129 of 1993 (Bhagirathi Lingawade and ors Vs. Laxmi Silk Mills), decided on 3.9.1993. The provisions of Section 41(1) of The Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, 1882 (for short, "PSCC Act") and section 5(4A) of The Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947 (for short, "the Rent Act") crop up for consideration in these petitions. In view of a conflict in the interpretation made by the Division Benches, in the aforesaid cases, on the language of these provisions the learned Single Judge has made a reference to the Larger Bench. The Hon’ble the Chief Justice has accordingly constituted this Full Bench to decide the same.

2. The Division Bench in Ramesh Dwarkadas Mehra’s case was dealing with the question, "Whether a suit by a licensor against a gratuitous licensee is tenable before t














































































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