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

1952 Supreme(All) 42

BIND BASNI PRASAD, GURTU
L. KEDAR NATH – Appellant
Versus
L. KISHAN LAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.S.DARBAR, Bhagwan Das Gupta

GURTU, J.

( 1 ) I agree that we must take into consideration any change in law which has supervened since the judgments in this case were entered.

( 2 ) THE U. P. Act III [3] of 1947 (U. P. Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947) was made applicable to the Hasanpur Notified Area on 26-9-1947, that is to say, on a date after the present second appeal was filed in this Court.

( 3 ) THE effect of the Notification in the Official Gazette declaring that the Act was applied to hasanpur is that every part of the Act becomes applicable. Once the Act is applied, it must, by virtue of Section 1, Sub-section (3), be deemed to have come into operation on 1-10-1946. That is a date which is prior to 29-11-1946 on which date the suit out of which this appeal arises, was instituted. Therefore, the position is that no decree for ejectment can now be passed on grounds other than those specified in Section 3 of the said Act.

( 4 ) WHEN the plaint was filed, the pleader could not have known that the plaint would be hit by an act which would have retrospective effect and, therefore, the plaint was not based on the restricted grounds which are available to a plaintiff under Section 3 of the af





























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