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

1986 Supreme(Gau) 17

MANISANA
Mohit Kumar Deb Roy & Others – Appellant
Versus
Gaurangalal Roy – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
N.Chakravarty, K.P.Sen, J.P.Bhattacharjee, B.Acharyya, A.Mannan, A.K.Laskar

This is a revision petition against the Judgment and dec­ree dated 19.6.1985 passed by the learned Assistant District Judge (I), Cachar, Silcbar in T.A. No. 37 of 1984, affirming and modifying the judgment and decree passed by the teamed Sadar Munsiff (2); Silchar, in T.S. No. 443 of 1981.

2. It is a case of concurrent findings of facts. The case of (he plaintiff-landlords is that the defendant-tenant had not paid the rents due from him for the period from November 1978 to October 1981 amounting to Rs. 5400/-. The Court be­low have given concurrent findings that the landlords refused to accept the rent for the month of November 1978 offered by the tenant; and that the tenant deposited the rent for November 1973 in time as provided under the law; however, the tenant deposited the rent for the month of December also in advance along with the rent for November; and that the amount of Rs. 5400/- had already been deposited, although some of the deposits have been made in advance.

3. Mr. Acharyya submits that some of the deposits made in advance in the Court after October 1978 will not amount to payment under sub-section 4 of section 5 of the Assam Ur­ban Areas Rent Control Act, 1972. His







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