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

2021 Supreme(Bom) 664

V.M.DESHPANDE
Krishnakumar – Appellant
Versus
Shri Kishore – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Mr. Fidvi Ibrahim Abid, Advocate, for the Appellant / Mr. A. S. Murty, Advocate, for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel for the parties. Heard Mr. Fidvi Ibrahim Abid, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr. A. S. Murty, learned counsel for respondents.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the order passed by learned District Judge-3, Nagpur dated 04.12.2019 below Exh.-39 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 49/2013 whereby learned appellate Court rejected the application filed by petitioner seeking permission to cross-examine original plaintiff.

3. Few facts would be necessary to be narrated here. They are as under.

The petitioner is tenant in shop block area 8 X 15 i.e. 120 Sq. Ft. on house property bearing Municipal Corporation house No. 7/0 + 5, survey no. 177, sheet no. 224, circle no.2, Division No.1, Ward No. 8, situated at Joharipura, Tilak Road, Mahal, Nagpur. The petitioner is a monthly tenant. His tenancy commences on the first day of English calendar month and ends on the last day of that month. The petitioner is tenant from 1982.

4. By virtue of sale deed dated 18.10.2004, the present respondents acquired the title of the property where the suit shop is situated. Thereafter, the tenancy

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