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

2001 Supreme(Raj) 1688

SUNIL KUMAR GARG
Khursid Akram – Appellant
Versus
Yunus Ali – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Harsh Vardhan, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Rishi Parashar, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. - This revision petition under section 115 CPC has been filed by the petitioner-defendant against the appellate order dated 16.2.2001 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge No. 5, Jaipur City, Jaipur by which he dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner-defendant and upheld the order dated 13.7.1999 passed by the learned Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 3, Jaipur City, Jaipur whereby he determined the provisional rent under section 13(3) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent& Eviction)Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1950') at the rate of Rs. 400/-p.m. for the shop in question with effect from 1.6.1994 to 1.7.1999.

2. The necessary facts for disposal of this revision petition, in short, are as follows:-

The respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for eviction and arrears of rent on various grounds against the petitioner-defendant in the lower court on 29.11.1997 stating that there is a shop mentioned in para 2 of the plaint and on 1.2.1993, it was given to petitioner-defendant on monthly rent of Rs. 300/- p.m. On22.1.1993, the petitioner-defendant has deposited Rs. 5000/- as advance for the purpose of paying rent. It was further stated in the






































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