DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
Udyavara R. Acharya – Appellant
Versus
Jugal Kishor Jagannath Sharda – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
I. Introduction :
When the successful decree-holder takes out eviction proceedings and wants to evict the tenant, the occupier obstructs. That obstruction results in adjudication, and that adjudication favours the owner. Aggrieved, the obstructor appeals, and that appeal favours the obstructor. Then, the owner challenges: Writ Petition No.5342 of 2018.
2. In fact, besides the obstruction petition, the trial Court also considers the owner’s application for mesne profits and allows it. The Appellate Court, however, holds that the question of mesne profits is interlinked with that of possession; it refuses to affirm the trial Court’s order. So, the landlord files the second writ petition: WP No. 5341 of 2018.
3. The owner maintains that the original tenant has breached the contract; therefore, the Obstructor, put in possession by the tenant, should take the consequences. He need not be heard independently. The Obstructor, conversely, asserts that his right is independent, and the eviction decree does not bind him; so he should be given an opportunity to vindicate his version. Whose plea should prevail? Let us see.
4. As both the Writ Petitions, to employ the appellate Court’s ex
N. S. S. Narayana Sarma v. Goldstone Exports (P) Ltd. (2002) 1 SCC 662
Silverline Forum Pvt. Ltd v. Rajiv Trust
Tangerine Electronics Systems Pvt. Ltd. v. Indian Chemicals
Balvant N. Viswamitra v. Yadav Sadashiv Mule
Bindichand Hiralal Bhandari v. Sadashiv Borbhade
Brahmdeo Chaudhary v. Rishikesh Prasad Jaiswal
Gordhandas Lalchand v. Kubchand Tirthdas Tailor
Kanaklata Das v. Naba Kumar Das
M/s. Importers and Manufacturers Ltd., v. Pheroze Framroze Taraporewala
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.