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

2002 Supreme(Raj) 925

B.S.CHAUHAN
Ganesh Singh – Appellant
Versus
Hari Singh – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Ashok Chhangani, for Petitioner

Honble CHAUHAN, J.–Instant revision has been filed against the order dated 14.3.2002, by which the learned trial Court has rejected the application of the petitioner under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ``the Code), observing that copy of the judgment and order dated 18.1.2002, in the suit between the non-petitioner and some other tenant, wherein it had been held that the need of the non-petitioner was not bonafide, is not admissible in evidence.

(2). The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the non-petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit for eviction of the petitioner-defendant on various grounds including the ground of his bonafide need. Non-petitioner/plaintiff had also field a suit against some other tenant on the same ground, including the ground of bonafide need, which stood dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 18.1.2000, holding that the non-petitioner/plaintiff failed to prove the requirement of bonafide need. Petitioner filed an application to take the copy of that judgment dated 18.11.2000 on record submitting that such a judgment, though not inter-party, was admissible in evidence, in view of the provisions of Section 13 re




































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