M.S.SONAK
Vasant Mahadeo Gujar – Appellant
Versus
Baitulla Ismail Shaikh – Respondent
M.S. SONAK, J.
1. Rule and interim relief was granted in these Civil Revision Applications by speaking order dated 4 February 2014. As against the same, the respondent-landlords preferred Special Leave Petitions before the Apex Court, which were dismissed on 2 May 2014. However, the Apex Court requested this Court to dispose of the pending Civil Revision Applications expeditiously. It is in these circumstances, that two Civil Revision Applications were taken up for final disposal.
2. The learned counsel for the parties requested that these two Civil Revision Applications be disposed of by common judgment and order. Even otherwise, the respondent-landlords in the two Civil Revision Applications are one and same. The tenants who have instituted these Civil Revision Applications occupy parts of the same House No. 86. The impugned orders proceed on basis of substantially similar facts and reasoning. After certain stage, common evidence came to be recorded in the two matters. For all these reasons, it would indeed be appropriate if these two Civil Revision Applications are disposed of by this common judgment and order.
3. The Civil Revision Application No. 770 of 2013 is institu
Ramniklal P. Mehta vs. Indradaman A. Sheth
Eastern Equipment & Sales Limited vs. ING Yash Kumar Khanna
Jaipur Development Authority vs. Kailashwati Devi
R.C. Sharma vs. Union of India
Suka Ishram Chaudhari vs. Jamnabai R. Gujarathi & Others
P.O.P.R. and Sons Pvt. Ltd. vs. Associates Publishers (Madras) Limited
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.