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

1971 Supreme(MP) 184

S.P.BHARGAVA, G.P.SINGH
CHANDAN BAI – Appellant
Versus
SURJAN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.P.MUNSHI, N.N.Pande, R.S.DABIR

SINGH, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal comes before us on a reference made by one of us.

( 2 ) THE appellant Chandanbai filed a suit for eviction against the respondent Surjan in 1964 on two grounds under Section 12 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh accommodation Control Act, 1961. The first ground was under Clause (a) of the said provision that the defendant did not pay the arrears of rent within two months of the ser vice of notice of demand. The second ground was under Clause (e) that the house was required bona fide by the plaintiff for residential purposes. The defendant in his written statement denied the existence of these grounds. During the pendency of the suit, the parties, on December 15, 1965, entered into a com promise which was filed in Court and a decree was passed on its basis on the following terms:--

(1) That the plaintiff's claim for ejectment and possession be and is hereby decreed. (2) That the defendant shall be allowed time to vacate the house till 3112-1968 and till that time the decree shall not be executed. (3) That the defendant has paid the entire rent till 31-12-1965 to the plaintiff. The amount deposited by the defendant towards the rent in court shall be withdrawn by the


















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