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

1998 Supreme(Guj) 400

D.C.SRIVASTAVA
P. D. TRIVEDI – Appellant
Versus
CHANDANBEN M. SHAH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: D.D.Vyas, S.S.BALSARA

D. C. SRIVASTAVA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is tenants revision under Sec. 29 (2) of the bombay Rent Act. The brief facts giving rise to this revision are that the disputed premises was let out by the respondent to the revisionist on monthly rent of Rs. 150. 00 besides taxes. The tenant tell in arrears of rent exceeding six months. Hence, notice of demand under Sec. 12 of the Act was served on 28-9-1982. Neither the notice was complied with nor any reply was given. Hence, suit for eviction was filed. During the pendency of the suit amendment was sought in the plaint and eviction was sought on additional ground under Sec. 13 (l) (c) of the Act alleging that by the conduct of the tenant in usurping possession of one room illegally and forcing the landlady to face litigation upto the Apex Court for getting the said room vacated from the tenant amounted to annoyance and nuisance to the landlady.

( 2 ) THE trial Court dismissed the suit for eviction but granted decree for arrears of rent and also fixed the standard rent at Rs. 150. 00 p. m.

( 3 ) AN appeal was filed by the landlady and also a revision by tenant fixing standard rent. The revision was dismissed by the lower Court. The appeal was again



















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