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

1977 Supreme(Pat) 151

NAGENDRA PRASAD SINGH, P.S.SAHAY
Mohammed Indris Mian – Appellant
Versus
Doman Sah – Respondent


Judgment

NAGENDRA PRASAD SINGH, J.

1. Defendant is the appellant in this second appeal. The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for eviction of the appellant from a house in which the appellant was a monthly tenant at a rental of Rs. 25/-. According to the plaintiff, the defendant had agreed to pay the aforesaid amount in the first week of the month following for which the rent became due, but later he defaulted in the payment of rent, and, as such , he was liable for eviction. A notice under S. 106 of the T. P. Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) was sent by the plaintiff as the karta of the family to the defendant through registered cover, but the defendant refused to receive the same on 13-6-1969. In that notice, the plaintiff had asked the defendant to vacate the house by 30th June, 1969. When the defendant did not vacate the house in question by that date, the plaintiff filed the suit in question in the Court of learned Munsif. Arrah for eviction of defendant. The defendant appeared and his defence, inter alia, was that he was owner of a portion of the house in question, and, as such, there was no question of the house being in his possession as a tenant or the defenda














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