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

2000 Supreme(Raj) 107

ARUN MADAN
Mangilal – Appellant
Versus
Mahesh Chand Purohit – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.K. Sharma, for Petitioner Suresh Pareek, for Respondents

Honble MADAN, J.–This civil revision petition has been filed against order dated 7.5.99, whereby the learned Additional District Judge, No.4, Jaipur City dismissed the petitioners First Appeal No. 34/98 for the reasons of having not deposited costs of Rs. 200/-as directed by appellate court on 26.3.99 when appeal was adjourned to 19.4.99 for final disposal.

(2). The fact relevant for disposal of this petition briefly stated are that the plaintiff (respondent) filed a suit of eviction (No. 739/93-(122/81) on the ground of default in payment of rent, under the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1950 which was decreed by the Civil Judge (JD), Jaipur City (West) under Judgment dated 3.4.98, which was challenged by the defendant (petitioner) in aforesaid First Appeal. The said first appeal was listed for final disposal on 26.3.99 when adjournment was sought on behalf of the counsel for the petitioner (appellant) on the ground of the arguing counsel having been out of station. The appellate court adjourned the appeal to 19.4.99 for final disposal subject to the payment of costs of Rs. 200/-. It is the case of the petitioner that the cost could not be deposited on 19.4.99







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