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

1976 Supreme(Guj) 104

A.D.DESAI, B.K.MEHTA, N.H.BHATT
CHAMPAKLAL DAHYABHAI NATALI – Appellant
Versus
SARASWATIBEN W/o SHAMBHUBHAI ATMARAM MEHTA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: A.G.PATEL, R.D.VYAS, S.N.SHELAT

A. D. DESAI, J.

( 1 ) THE decisions of two Division Benches are conflic- ting on the issue as to whether a person who purchases the leased property along with arrears of rent prior to his purchase can evict a tenant in view of the provisions of sec. 12 of the Bombay Rents Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act 1947 (hereinafter referred to as he Act) and that is why the said point is referred to us. The facts in all the civil revision applications are similar and we shall state briefly the facts in Civil Revision Application No. 533 of 1969 which are that the suit property is a part of Nondh No. 817 situated in the city of Surat. The leased property is used as a stable. The present owner purchased the property on August 4 1966 from its previous owner with the right to recover the rent already due at the date of transfer from the defendanttenant. The rent was due from July 1 1965 The Plaintiff-landlord therefore gave a notice to the defendant-tenant demanding the rent due from July 1 1965 to October 31 1966 and claimed possession of the suit premises on the ground of arrears of rent. The rent from July 1 1965 to July 31 1966 that is for 12 months was due at the time when the prope

























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