Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH
ROHIT W.JOSHI
Jafarbhai Amirbhai (Since Deceased) Through His Legal Heirs – Appellant
Versus
Shantabai Gangadhar Kamle (Since Deceased) Through His Legal Heirs – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.
1. The present Second Appeal is preferred against judgment and decree dated 27/06/2023, passed by the learned District Judge – 17, Nagpur in Regular Civil Appeal No.430/2016 and judgment and decree dated 02/05/2016, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Ramtek in Regular Civil Suit No.26/2004.
2. The appellants in the present appeal are legal representatives of the original defendant. The respondent is legal representative of original plaintiff. The suit was filed, seeking decree of eviction, permanent and mandatory injunction with possession and damages. The case of the plaintiff is that she is owner of the suit property, which comprises of land bearing Survey No.88 admeasuring 0.74 acres, situated at Ramtek, Tahsil Ramtek, District Nagpur. It is the case of the plaintiff that out of the said land, a portion of land admeasuring 3500 sq. ft. (35 ft. East-West and 100 ft. North-South) was granted on lease to the defendant around 25 years before the institution of suit. The case of the plaintiff is that the tenancy was a monthly tenancy commencing from first day of each English calendar month and expiring on the last date thereof. The rent is
In eviction suits, admitted landlord-tenant relationship estops tenant from denying title; landlord needs only prove relationship and grounds, not ownership. Open land leases not protected by rent co....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Plaintiff must prove the relationship of landlord and tenant to be entitled to the reliefs sought in an eviction suit.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that concurrent findings of facts and law recorded by the lower courts cannot be interfered with unless they are found to be perverse to the extent....
A tenant cannot challenge the ownership of the landlord while concurrently asserting adverse possession; such defenses are mutually exclusive under established legal principles.
a tenant cannot challenge the title of the owner/landlord, and there is an estoppel in this regard, in terms of Section 116 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
The burden of proof lies on the plaintiff to establish the license to evict a licensee, and the defendant must prove genuine tenancy through admissible evidence. Courts can reject suspicious document....
Tenancy and Land laws - Eviction - There is nothing that petitioners have been able to bring forth to indicate that finding has been arrived at by a misreading of facts or omitting relevant evidence ....
The court affirmed that ownership claims must be supported by documentary evidence, and the principle of preponderance of probability governs determinations of title and tenancy.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
