Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Bhagwan Singh – Appellant
Versus
Kanhaiya Lal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. lease rights claimed by kanhaiya lal. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 2. dispute over kanhaiya lal's status as lessee or licensee. (Para 6 , 8 , 10) |
| 3. adj's ruling on impleadment of legal heirs. (Para 7 , 9 , 11) |
| 4. limits of article 227 jurisdiction. (Para 13 , 14 , 19) |
| 5. application of order xxii rule 3. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 6. no conclusion on lessee vs. licensee. (Para 26 , 35) |
CM No. 31377/2022 (exemption) and CM No. 31378/2022 (exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The applications stands disposed of.
CM (M) 685/2022
3. This petition throws up a very limited controversy.
4. Respondent 1 Kanhaiya Lal filed Suit 956/2018 (Kanhaiya Lal v. MCD & others) against, inter alia, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and the petitioner Bhagwan Singh. In the suit, Kanhaiya Lal claimed to be a lessee of the suit premises.
5. The case set up by the plaintiff in the suit was this: The plaintiff is a washerman. A particular area in Timarpur, New Delhi, was demarcated, prior to India attaining independence, for washermen to wash clothes. It was identified as a "Dhobi Ghat". Yearly leases of the Dhobi Ghat were granted by the municipal authorities.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
