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

1974 Supreme(Raj) 44

LODHA
Babu Lal – Appellant
Versus
Kanhaiya Lal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
L.R. Mehta, for Appellants; Hastimal, for Respondent

LODHA, J.—This is a defendants second appeal arising out of a suit for arrears of rent and ejectment.

2. The plaintiff-respondents case as set out in the plaint is that the premises in question which consist of a shop and a Medi, situated in village Deoli were rented out to the defendant Chiranjilal (who is now dead and represented by his legal representatives Babulal and others - appellants) by one Gadmal receiver of the firm Daulatram Chandanmal on Kartik Sudi 1, S. 1998 on a monthly rent of Rs. 5/4/-. It is further alleged that the partition commissioner of Ladhas estate, appointed by the Calcutta High Court sold the premises in question to Chhajulal Banshi Lal by a registered sale deed dated 6-2 1947 and Chiranjilal attorned in favour of the vendees Chhajulal Banshilal. The plaintiff goes on to state that since Chiranjilal did not pay rent to Chhajulal Banshi Lal, the latter filed a suit in the Court of Sub Judge, Kekri for arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 172/10/- and the same was decreed on 9 8 1955. The prayer for ejectment was, however, disallowed on the ground that the notice of termination of tenancy dated 25-7-1949 served on the tenant was not legal and valid. It is furth













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