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

1989 Supreme(Raj) 80

M.C.JAIN
Firm Kirparam Ganeshilal – Appellant
Versus
Vijay Kumar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.M. Bhandari, & H.N Calla, for Petitioner; Rajendra Mehta, for Non-petitioner.

MILAP CHANDRA, J.—This revision petition has been filed against the order of the learned Additional District Judge, No. 2, Sri Ganganagar dated January 21, 1989 by which he dismissed the application of the defendant petitioner moved under section 51 and order 47 Rule 1, Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) and Section 14(4), Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and also application moved under section 5, Limitation Act for reviewing the order dated December 9, 1985 striking out his defence and condoning the delay for depositing the amount of rent determined. The facts of the case giving rise to this petition may be summarised thus.

2. The plaintiff non petitioner instituted a suit against the defendant petitioner for his eviction on various grounds including the ground of default in payment of rent. On July 30, 1985, the learned Additional District Judge provisionally determined the amount of Rs. 33,105.13 as rent etc. It was not paid within fifteen days. An application for extension of time for payment was made by the defendant petitioner. By order dated September, 2, 1985, two months time was furt






















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