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

1996 Supreme(Mad) 1254

S.M.ABDUL WAHAB
Mahaveer Electric Corporation – Appellant
Versus
D. Ashok Kumar and others – Respondent


Advocates:
Mr. V.R.Gopalan, Advocate for Petitioner:Mr.H.Nazimuddin, Advocate for Respondents.

Judgment :

1. These revisions arise out of a common order passed in M.P.Nos.683 of 1993 and 738 of 1993 in E.P. No. 368 of 1993 in R.C.O.P. No. 40 of 1993 dated 12. 1993.

2. M.P. No. 683 of 1993 is for setting aside the exparte order dated 9. 1993 in E.P. No. 368 of 1993 and M.P. No. 738 of 1993 is for a direction to the bailiff to effect redelivery of the demised property "as is where condition" to the petitioner. Learned XIII Judge, Small Cause Court by his order dated 12. 1993 rejected the M.P. No. 738 of 1983 and consequently on the same date rejected M.P. No. 368 of 1993 also. The above two petitions were filed by aggrieved tenant.

3. The short facts for understanding the scope of the revisions are as follows:

R.C.O.P. No. 40 of 1993 was filed by the landlord for eviction of the petitioner from a godown bearing door No. 7, Thambu Naick Street, Madras-79. The said godown forms part of a big building. Notices were sent to the said addresses. As the petitioner herein did not appear, an exparte eviction order was passed. Subsequently in E.P. No. 368 of 1993 the landlord has taken possession of the said godown. The delivery order in E.P. No. 368 of 1993 was also an exparte orde























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