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

2003 Supreme(MP) 869

S.K.PANDE
GOUS MOHD. – Appellant
Versus
MOHD. ANWAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
M.YUNUS, R.K.Nagarjan

S. K. PANDE, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision under Section 115 of CPC is directed against the order dt. 26-8-2000, passed by 12th ADJ. Jabalpur in MCA No. 59/98 affirming the order dt. 3-9-98, passed by 11th Civil Judge Class-II, jabalpur in MJC No. 77/97 whereby application under Order 22, Rule 10, CPC filed by the applicant has been dismissed.

( 2 ) PLAINTIFF/non-APPLICANTS-AWADH Bihari and Govind instituted C. S. No. 325-A/94 in the Court of Civil Judge seeking eviction of tenant-defendant/non-applicants Nos. 1 to 5 on grounds under Section 12 (l){a) (e) of the mp Accommodation Control Act (hereinafter referred to the "act" for convenience ). The suit was decreed ex parte vide judgment dt. 6-10-1994. Defendant/non-applicants Nos. 1 to 5 thereafter filed application under Order 9, Rule 13, CPC for setting aside the ex parte decree in C. S. No. 325-A/94. Plaintiff/non-applicants Awadh Bihari, Govind soni, vide Regd. Sale-deed dated 4-3-1996 sold the suit house to the applicant Gous mohd. and specifically assigned the decree passed by 10th Civil Judge Class-II in C. S. No. 325-A/94 in favour of applicant. Since the application under Order 9, Rule 13, CPC is pending, applicant filed applicati









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