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

2006 Supreme(Del) 1686

VIKRAMAJIT SEN
SUDERSHAN SINHA – Appellant
Versus
KULDEEP SINGH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AJAY BRAHMI, MAHAJABIN SHAMIM, Praveen Agarwal, S.K.PURI, SOMESH ARORA


VIKRAMAJIT SEN, J.

( 1 ) THE Plaintiff has initiated this Suit for eviction, possession, injunction mesne profits and damages. Pleadings have been completed. The plaintiff has also filed an application under Order XII Rule 6 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying that the Court may "pass a judgment on admission in favour of the Plaintiff and against the defendants in terms of the prayer clause contained in the Suit". It cannot even be imagined how a decree for mesne profits can justifiably be granted at this stage since neither an 'admission' nor cogent evidence is available. In the interest of justice, therefore, I shall at the present moment restrict the prayer to the claim for possession/eviction alone.

( 2 ) THE facts of the case are that the Plaintiffs are the owners of plot No. 120 B, Sainik Farms, New Delh. The Plaint states that the Defendant was inducted as a licensee for a term of eleven months which expired on 24. 7. 1998. This period is stated to have been renewed by mutual agreement for further period of eleven months each on the increased licence fee of Rs. 18,000. 00 per month and thereafter Rs. 22,000. 4 till April 2001. It is admitted that t























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