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

1976 Supreme(Bom) 231

AGRAWAL
Ganpat – Appellant
Versus
Motilal Champalal Lunawat – Respondent


Advocates:
K.Y. Mandlik, for Petitioner; V.V. Karmarkar, for Opponent No.1.

ORDER :- The present writ petition under Art.227 of the Constitution is filed by the petitioner-landlord who has lost in the trial Court as well as in the appellate Court. The suit for eviction was filed on the grounds of arrears of rent and reasonable and bona fide personal requirement under the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "the Bombay Rent Act"). The respondent is the tenant. In order to understand the nature of the controversy between the parties, it is necessary to refer to some details.

2. The respondent has been a tenant of the suit premises for several years. Prior to December 1958 he was paying monthly rent of Rupees 50/- to the then owner. Between December 1958 and April 1964, the owner was different. The present petitioner purchased the suit property in April 1964. The petitioner's predecessor-in-title had filed Regular Civil Suit No.245 of 1962 against the respondent, in which the standard rent was fixed at Rs. 16/- per month. A sum of Rs. 1475/- was paid on account of rent in that suit. That suit came to be dismissed on 28th December 1963. The petitioner's predecessor-in-title preferred an appeal being Civil Ap




























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