SUDESH BANSAL
Brajendra Singh – Appellant
Versus
Madho Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sudesh Bansal, J. - The appellant-defendant-tenant (hereafter 'the tenant') have preferred this second appeal assailing the judgment and decree dated 20-9-2007 passed by the Additional District Judge No. 2, Bharatpur in first appeal No. 62/1997 allowing appeal reversed the judgment dated 13-2-1997 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1, Bharatpur in civil suit No. 76/1991 and decreed the suit for eviction of tenant from shop in question and fixed the mesne profits Rs. 140/- per month.
2. Facts as culled out from the record are that respondent-plaintiff-landlord (hereafter 'the landlord') filed a suit on 31-5-1988 for eviction of tenant stating therein that shop in question was in tenancy of the tenant defendant No. 1 Brijendra Singh @ Bijjo from the time of erstwhile landlord Ganpat Singh on a rent of Rs. 140/- per month, which was purchased by landlord through registered sale deed dated 10-12-1986 of which information was given to tenant 24-1-1987. It was pleaded that the tenant did not pay rent from 1-12-1986 as such he committed default in payment of rent. It was pleaded that the shop in question was bonafidely needed for his son Laxmi Narayan for Ki
Amarjit Singh vs. Smt. Khatoon Quamarain (AIR 1987 SC 741)
Deena Nath vs. Pooran Lal (AIR 2001 SC 2655)
Fakir Mohd. vs. Sita Ram (AIR 2002 SC 433)
Jagannath vs. Arulappa (2005) 12 SCC 303)
Kondiba Dagadu Kadam vs. Savitribai Sopan Gurjar (1999) 3 SCC 722)
S.J. Ebenezer vs. Velayudhan (AIR 1998 SC 746)
Santosh Hazari vs. Purushottam Tiwari (2001) 3 SCC 179)
Smt. Annapurna Dei vs. Akbar Patel (AIR 1974 Ori 162)
State Bank of India vs. Emmsons International Limited (2011) 12 SCC 174)
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.