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

1992 Supreme(MP) 111

R.C.LAHOTI
GANGARAM – Appellant
Versus
MUNICIPAL COUNSEL, NAGAR PALIKA, NEEMUCH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
K.K.SANGHAVI, S.D.SANGHI, S.L.GARG, S.S.Garg

R. C. LAHOTI, J.

( 1 ) THIS judgment shall also govern the disposal of Second Appeal No. 25/74 (Smt. Seriubai v. Municipal Council, Neemuch) arising in similar facts and raising similar questions for decision. Facts relating to S. A. No. 277/72 :

( 2 ) S. A. No. 277/72 is by Gangaram S/o Bharaji resident of Neemuch, who having expired, his legal representatives have been brought on record. The suit was filed seeking a declaration that the plaintiff was a pakka tenent of garden No. 12 situated within limits of Neemuch Municipality and that recovery of Rs. 4,384/- from the plaintiff was void, with consequent injunction restraining the recovery. According to the plaintiff though the land was held by him as a lessee of the Neemuch Municipality; but by operation of law he had become Bhumiswami; the land being in reality owned by the State, the Municipality having no right and title therein and hence any demand on account of rent payable under the lease at the instance of the Neemuch Municipality was null and void.

( 3 ) THE facts and documents brought on record go to show that on 1-6-1939 late Bharaji was having a lease for a period of 10 years commencing lst April 1939 and expiring 31/03




























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