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

1987 Supreme(Ker) 212

G.VISWANATHA.IYER
PHILOMINA – Appellant
Versus
EXECUTIVE OFFICER – Respondent


Judgment :-

Petitioner's husband and two others had been permitted to use fifteen cents of land belonging to the second respondent in, Sy. No. 97/6/2/2 of Varapuzha Village, for running a theatre. That was in the year 1979. Subsequently the petitioner's husband acquired the rights of his partners and became the sole proprietor of the theatre. After the death of the husband in March, 1983, the petitioner was running the theatre. It is admitted that the relationship between the petitioner and the second respondent is that of licensee and licensor (vida para 5 of O.P.). Petitioner states that a theatre was accordingly put up with a total investment of Rs. 2,12,000/-. The licence agreement was from year to year in the first instance. The latest agreement (a copy of which has been produced by the second respondent as Ext. R2(a)) was however, only for a period of eleven months, expiring on 30 IM986.

2. The licence agreement Ext. R2(a) permits the petitioner and her son to exihibit cinematograph films in the theatre in the property described

take away the materials and the machineries therein and to vacate the premises without raising any objection at the expiry of eleven months from Januar
























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