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

1978 Supreme(All) 13

M.P.MEHROTRA
Safi Devi – Appellant
Versus
Mahadeo Prasad – Respondent


Advocates:
K.C. Saxena, for Appellant; Standing Counsel, for Respondent.

JUDGMENT :- This second appeal arises out of a suit which the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 filed against five defendants. Defendants Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 are respondents Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5 respectively in the instant appeal. The defendant No. 5 Smt. Safi Devi, is the appellant before me. The plaintiff sought the recovery of possession of house No. 77, Muthiganj, Allahabad. A decree for mesne profits @ Re. 1/- per day with effect from June 10, 1968 to the date of suit amounting to Rs. 50/- and pendente lite and future mesne profits at the same rate until the delivery of possession were also claimed. Further, the plaintiff claimed rent from the tenant defendant No. 4 Jagannath, @ Rs. 12/- per month from June 10, 1968 to the date of suit amounting to Rs. 20/- and pendente lite and future rent.

2. The brief facts are these : A sale deed was executed on June 10, 1968 by the defendant No. 1, Kartik Prasad acting for himself and as the father and guardian of his minor son, Bhanu, defendant No. 2 and by Atul Roy, defendant No. 3, in favour of the plaintiff, Mahadeo Prasad. The sale deed was executed in respect of house No. 77, Muthiganj, Allahabad and for a stated consideration of Rs. 4,000/-.


























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