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

1998 Supreme(MP) 659

D.M.DHARMADHIKARI
VITTHALRAO – Appellant
Versus
SHIVRATAN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.L.HARDIA

D. M. DHARMADHIKARI, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been directed against the order dated 20-11-1996 passed by the 10th Civil Judge Class II, Gwalior whereby application under Order 6, Rule 17, C. P. C. filed by the plaintiffs seeking permission to raise certain factual and legal pleas has been rejected.

( 2 ) THE facts mentioned below would explain the cause for prefering this revision by the plaintiffs. According to the plaintiffs' case, the premises in suit which was initially open plot inside the Bada named 'mahadik Sahab Ka Bada' in Dal Bazar, Lashkar, Gwalior was given on rent to the Predecessor-in-title of the defendants by Shakuntala Devi, predecessor-in-title of the plaintiffs, for the business of grain and oil-seed under a rent note executed as back as on 8-12-1953. It is not in dispute that there exists a mortgage deed executed on 14-7-1955 between the deceased landlady and the tenant in which the tenanted premises in suit were mortgaged by the landlady in favour of the tenant for a mortgage money of Rs. 2000/- with an agreement that the mortgage would be renewed after three years and till then the interest payable on the mortg
















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