VIKRAMAJIT SEN, G.P.MITTAL
Hill Elliott & Co. Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Bhupinder Singh – Respondent
G.P. Mittal, J.
1. Appellant takes exception to the order dated 26th October, 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Suit (OS) No. 2400/2008 whereby IA No. 9073/2010 under Order 12 Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) was allowed and suit for possession filed by the Respondent was decreed.
2. We have heard Shri G.L. Rawal senior counsel for the Appellant threadbare.
3. Before we go into merits of the Appeal, we may sum-up essential facts necessary for disposal of the Appeal.
4. The Respondent (hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiff) is owner of Property No. S-323, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi. He had let out the ground floor, first floor, garage with servant quarter and lawn attached to the said construction to the Appellant (hereinafter referred to as `Hill Elliott') through a registered Lease Deed dated 16.10.1982. The tenure of the lease was for a period of four years expiring on 12.10.1986. According to the Plaintiff no registered Lease Deed was executed thereafter and thus Hill Elliott became statutory tenant on month to month basis on paying agreed rent @ Rs. 7,000/- per month. The tenancy of Hill Elliott was terminated vide a notice dated 9.08.2008 w.e.f.
C.C. Alavi Haji v. Palapetty Muhammed and Anr. (2007) 6 SCC 555
D. Vinod Shivappa v. Nanda Belliappa (2006) 6 SCC 456 : 2006 89 DRJ 129 SC)
Gautam Sarup v. Leela Jetly & Anr. (2008) 7 SCC 85
Geo-Group Communications Inc. v. IOL Broadband Limited (2010) 1 SCC 562
Green View Radio Service v. Laxmibai Ramji & Anr. AIR 1990 SC 2156
Modi Spg. & Mvg. Mills Co. Ltd. v. Ladha Ram & Co. (1976) 4 SCC 320
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.