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

1976 Supreme(Del) 98

V.S.DESHPANDE
ANGOORI DEVI – Appellant
Versus
CHAMELI DEVI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
N.R.Suri, R.C.Sawhney

V. S. DESHPANDE, J.

( 1 ) THE question whether this Court can interfere with the decision of the Judge, Court of Small Causes, Delhi depends on the true construction of the ambit of section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 under which this revision has been filed by the plaintiff-petitioner. Section 25 is as follows :-

"revision of decrees and orders of Courts of Small Causes.- The High Court, for the purpose of satisfying itself that a decree or order made in any case "decided by a Court of Small Causes was according to law, may call for the case and pass such order with respect thereto as it thinks fit. "

( 2 ) THE suit of the plaintiff petitioner for recovery of arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 28. 00 from 8-3-1969 to 7-1-1970 amounting to Rs. 280. 00 from the defendant respondent, her tenant, was only partly decreed by the learned Small Cause Judge because he held that the rent agreed to be payable by the defendant respondent to the plaintiff petitioner for a room measuring 8x6 sq. feet was only 5. 00 per month as averred by the defendant respondent and not Rs. 28. 00 per month as was claimed by the plaintiff petitioner. The evidence before the learned judge w





















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