GURSHARANLAL
Farooq Ahmad – Appellant
Versus
Muneshwar Bux Singh – Respondent
2. The shop was admittedly taken on rent by Farooq Ahmad from Muneshwar Bux Singh. The latter claimed that a lease had been executed under which the tenancy was to terminate on 30-6-1965 unless the landlord agreed to continue the defendant as a tenant. A dispute was raised about the lease but it was held proved and no controversy has been raised in this court about this lease. Exhibit 4, having been executed by the appellant Farooq Ahmad. It is not in controversy that the appellant was retained as a tenant beyond 30-6-1965 and it was only on 13-2-1968 that a notice was sent to him for vacating the Shop. The suit was thereafter instituted on 23-4-1968 when Farooq Ahmad did not vacate the shop.
3. Two points arose for determination in the suit on the basis of the pleadings of the pa
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.