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

1946 Supreme(Mad) 112

KUPPUSWAMI AYYAR
Amritlal N. Shah – Appellant
Versus
V. Nageswara Rao – Respondent


Advocates:
D. Suryaprakasa Rao for Petitioner.
B. Jagannadha Das and T. P. Gopalakrishna Aiyar for Respondent.

Order

This is a petition to revise the order of the Additional First Class Magistrate of Rajahmundry in M.C. No. 12 of 1944 dropping further proceedings under section 145(5), Criminal Procedure Code. The petitioner had taken on lease the Hanuman Palace also called Amrit Talkies in Lakshmivarapetta at Rajamundry from the respondent and another, and he was in possession of the same till 9th September, 1944. The petitioner is a person who belonged to Bangalore and he had taken this building on lease for running cinema shows. The petitioner had taken a licence. Representing to the District Magistrate that under the terms of the lease the licence should be taken by him only in the name of the lessor, the lessor, the respondent, got the licence issued to himself, and a notice was also issued saying that the respondent was entitled to possession. The notice ran as if the District Magistrate had consulted the Government Pleader and had accepted his opinion. Accordingly, when the petitioner was absent his manager and others were sent out and the respondent went to the Talkies got possession of the property and began to run the show. The petitioner got information from his manager and other s





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