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

1985 Supreme(Ker) 260

THOMAS
KARTHIAYANI – Appellant
Versus
VENKITACHALA IYER – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. A landlord in quest for an order of eviction of his tenant finds that the desired order is within the ken of his sight but yet outside the limit of his reach, drifting like a mirage. The order he seeks for is one under S. H (3) of Act 2 of 1965.

2. A litigation initiated by him in 1978 has already covered a chequered career by now and the present stage is when the District Court has upheld his claim as bona fide, in reversal of a contrary finding by the two Courts earlier. In arriving at that finding the District Court has appointed a Commissioner and basing on the report of that Commissioner, it held that though the landlord is in possession of another building, the same is not suitable for his residential purposes and hence "the possession of that building by the landlord is not a ground to disallow the claim under S.11 (3) of the Act". The said order of the District Court is challenged by the tenant in this revision petition filed under S.115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

3. Some more facts are to be narrated for a proper appreciation of the points urged in this revision. The landlord filed the petition for eviction of the tenant on the ground that he bona fide ne



















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