S.C.DHARMADHIKARI
Jainath Matadin Chourasia – Appellant
Versus
Gopikishan Ramgopal Garg – Respondent
1. Rule. The Respondents waive service. By consent, Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. This Civil Revision Application challenges the judgment and decree of the lower Appellate Court in Appeal No.114/2010 dated 28.09.2012.
3. The lower Appellate Court by the order under challenge has proceeded to confirm the judgment and decree of the Trial Court in RAE Suit No.139/2005 dated 28.01.2010 on the ground of change of user of the premises by the present Applicants/ original Defendants.
4. The Trial Judge had decreed the suit by holding that the Respondents have proved that the premises were not used for a period of more than six months prior to the date of filing of the suit and that the Applicant/Defendant No.1 has changed the user of the suit premises and from residential to commercial, that he has acquired alternate residential premises and which are suitable for him and that he had also illegally parted with possession of the premises to the Defendant No.2 in contravention of the provisions of the Rent Control Legislation. Equally, the ground of nuisance and annoyance being caused to the Respondents, is also proved. However, the Trial Court held that the acts of the Applica
Bhatumal Raichand Oswal Vs. Laxmibai R. Tarta and another
Sant Ram Vs. Rajinder Lal and others
Gurdial Batra Vs. Raj Kumar Jain, AIR 1989 SC 1841. 26, 29
M. Arul Jothi and another Vs. Lajja Bal (deceased) and another, AIR 2000 SC 1122. 30
Bharat Lal Baranwal Vs. Virendra Kumar Agarwal, 2003(3) ALL MR 313 (S.C.) : AIR 2003 SC 1056 32
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.