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

1990 Supreme(Guj) 91

G.T.NANAVATI
DHIRAJLAL JASMATBHAI VIRADIYA – Appellant
Versus
GUJARAT STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: J.M.THAKAR, S.M.SHAH, Sandip C.Shah

G. T. NANAVATI, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners are carrying on business in the name and style of Bajrang Auto Electric at Rajkot. It is their case that they took on lease a shop from its owner R. R. Engineering Works Rajkot on 1-1-1985. It was an oral lease. Subsequently on 28 they executed a rent note setting out the terms and conditions of the lease. Since 1-10-1985 they are in continuous possession of the shop as a tenant. On 17-12-1987 officers of the respondent-Corporation came to their shop and told petitioner No. 2 to vacate that shop and hand over possession immediately. On a request made by petitioner No. 2 time was given to him to consult his Advocate. Petitioner No. 2 then locked the shop and went to consult his Advocate When he returned he found that the lock was broken open and another lock was applied in its place. The petitioners on making an inquiry came to know that the said look was applied by the officers of the Corporation. They further came to know thereafter that their landlord R. R. Engineering Works had taken a loan from the respondent-Corporation and at that time agreed not to let or transfer its industrial establishment for which the loan was taken and as their l

















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