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

1974 Supreme(All) 46

AMITAV BANERJI
Ram Swarup Jain – Appellant
Versus
Janki Devi Bhagat Trust – Respondent


Advocates:
V.D. Ojha, for Applicant; B.D. Agarwal, for Respondent.

Judgement

JUDGMENT :- This is an appeal by the defendant. Plaintiff filed the suit for the ejectment of the defendant, for recovery of Rs. 2765 as arrears of rent and for future and pendente lite mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 75 per month. The suit was decreed by the trial court holding that the defendant had committed a default in the payment of rent and the notice of ejectment was valid. The lower appellate court in appeal decided the only question that was raised before it, namely, that the notice dated the 30th May, 1963 was a valid notice. The appeal was dismissed. Aggrieved the defendant appellant has come up in appeal in this Court.

2. The only point urged in this case was that the notice dated the 30th May, 1963 did not validly terminate the tenancy and it subsisted. There is no dispute now that the lease was for a manufacturing purpose. Normally a notice for a period of six months is necessary to terminate the tenancy. But if there is a contract to the contrary it will be for the period stated in the contract. The case of the plaintiff is that there is a contract to the contrary for there is a lease in writing. Ext. 12 is the lease executed between the Secretary of the pl
















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