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

2009 Supreme(HP) 242

KULDIP SINGH
NOTIFIED AREA COMMITTEE – Appellant
Versus
BHAGAT RAM – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:Mr. R.K.Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent:Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Kuldip Singh , Judge:-The appellant was defendant in Civil Suit No. 79 of 1989 which was dismissed on 4.2.1994 by the learned Sub Judge, Una. In Civil Appeal No. 24 of 1994, the learned District Judge, Una has set-aside the judgment, decree dated 4.2.1994 and restrained the appellant from evicting respondent by taking recourse to Section 4 of the H.P.Public Premises Act (Eviction and Rent Recovery )Act, 1971 (for short ‘Act’). In this way, the defendant has come in second appeal.

2. The facts, in brief, are that respondent on 6.2.1989 had filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the appellant from initiating or continuing with the proceedings before the Collector under the Act on the ground that respondent is a trespasser of land underneath the property shown with red ink mark A, B, C, D, E & F in site plan comprised in Khasra No. 128, village Santokhgarh, Tehsil and District Una vide jamabandi for the year 1983-84.

3. The pleaded facts of the case are that respondent as an ex-serviceman through his Commanding Officer applied for allotment of plot so as to run a stall to earn his livelihood on the land of appellant. The plot was allotted to respondent by appellan






























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