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

1986 Supreme(Cal) 400

A.M.BHATTACHARJEE, S.K.SEN
BUNGO STEEL FURNITURE PVT LTD – Appellant
Versus
PULIN CHANDRA DAW – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.C.DATTA, B.M.MITRA, Subrata Nayak

A. M. BHATTACHARJEE, S. K. SEN

( 1 ) THE suit that has wended to this Court in this second appeal was instituted by the respondent-lessor for eviction of the appellant-lessee from the lease-hold premises on the ground of determination of the lease by forfeiture under the provisions of Section 111 (g) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, the provisions relating to eviction as under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 not being applicable to the lease in view of Section 3 of the said Act as the lease was for more that 15 years. Eviction has been decreed by the trial court and the said decree has also been confirmed by the first appellate court and hence this second appeal by the lessee.

( 2 ) IN assailing the concurrent finding of the courts below as to the determination of the lease by forfeiture, Mr. Saktinath Mukherjee, the learned counsel for the appellant, has mainly urged that even assuming that there was forfeiture of the lease on the ground of non-payment of rent and sub-letting as alleged, there was a clear waiver of forfeiture on the part of the lessor and as a result of such waiver eviction could in no way be decreed on the ground of determination of the lease by






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