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

1972 Supreme(Ori) 43

G.K.MISRA, K.B.PANDA
HAJI AHMED HAJI IBRAHIM – Appellant
Versus
HADU SUBUDHI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.K.RAO, B.M.PATNAIK, G.RATH, S.P.RAJU

G. K. MISRA, C. J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner is the landlord and the Opposite Party No. 1 is the tenant. The petitioner's case as mentioned in the application for eviction may be stated in short. The disputed house consists of a room abutting the main road. Just adjacent to it there are two other rooms. The three rooms are in the front of the main business premises of the petitioner. These three rooms located side by side had been rented out by the petitioner long back at a time when they were not considered necessary for business purposes. The petitioner originally constituted a partnership firm. Recently it has been reconstituted by separate allocation of business. Haji Ahmed Ibrahim, one of the partners, got the business of the firm at berhampur to his share. The volume and turnover of the business considerably increased in recent years with consequential expansion of the staff and the records. The petitioner has agencies of several standard commodities and articles, one of them being the agency of cloths of Buckingham and Carnatic Mills. The said Mills insisted upon having a show-room where different varieties of stocks are to be exhibited for publicity. In the absence of a show-ro






















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