ROBIN PHUKAN
Gobardhan Prasad Modi, S/o Sew Dayal Modi – Appellant
Versus
Ahmed Tea Co. (P) Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. P.J. Saikia, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. R.S. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. J. Patowary, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. This revision petition, under Section 115, read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 03.02.2018 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Dibrugarh (herein after first appellate court), in Title Appeal No.2/2016. It is to be noted here that vide impugned judgment and decree dated 03.02.2018, the learned First Appellate Court has affirmed the judgment and decree dated 26.11.2015 passed by the learned Munsiff No.2, Dibrugarh, in Title Suit No.40/2006. It is also to be noted here that vide impugned judgment and decree dated 26.11.2015, the learned Munsiff No.2, Dibrugarh, has decreed the suit by directing the petitioner herein to vacate the suit premises on the ground of defaulter and bonafide requirement.
3. The back grounds facts leading to filing of the present revision petition is briefly stated as under:-
Ramakrishna Mission v. Sagarmoy Dey
Assam Cycle Company v. Motilal Bothra
Rashik Lal & Ors. v. Shah Gokuldas
S.P. Deshmukh v. Shah Nihal Chand Waghajibhai Gujarati
Manjusree Chakraborty & Ors. vs. M. Ahmed Bhuyan and Company & Anr.
Parul Bala Debnath & Ors. vs. Umatara Roy
Ragavendra Kumar v. Firm Prem Machinary & Co.
M/s. Sait Nagjee Purushotham & Co. Ltd. V. Vimalabai Prabhulal & Ors.
Anil Bajaj & Anr. Vs. Vinod Ahuja
The court affirmed that a landlord's bonafide requirement for premises is valid, and the tenant's irregular rent payments constitute default.
The court affirmed that a tenant's failure to comply with statutory rent payment timelines constitutes default, justifying eviction. Landlord's bona fide need for premises for business is a valid gro....
The tenant must prove compliance with the Rent Control Act's provisions to avoid eviction; failure to establish bona fide requirement by the landlord can lead to dismissal of eviction claims.
It is also made clear that this Court while exercising the revisional jurisdiction is not and cannot be equated with the power of re-consideration of all question of facts as the Court of First Appea....
Point of law: “Any aggrieved party” the expression employed in Section 20(1), means a person feeling aggrieved by the ultimate decision, that is, the operative part of the order. A party to the proce....
Suit for realisation of the arrear rent for the period of the eviction proceedings would result in failure of justice as well as nullify the proposition of law that the tenant is bound to pay rent du....
Point of law: In terms with the Act of 1972, the jurisdiction of the First Appellate Court under Section 8 of the said Act is the final authority in the matter and the scope of revisional jurisdictio....
The court established that revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the CPC is confined to jurisdictional errors, and findings of fact by lower courts cannot be disturbed unless they are perverse....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.