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

2000 Supreme(MP) 31

V.N.KHARE, S.N.PHUKAN
Ragavendra Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Firm Prem Machinery and Co. – Respondent


Advocates:
A.K. Sanghi for appellant; Satish Chandra with T. Tandon for respondent.

JUDGMENT

Phukan, J.–1. This appeal at the instance of the defendant tenant is directed against the judgment and decree dated 14.5.1998 passed by the High Court of M.P. at Jabalpur in Second Appeal No. 55 of 1998 reversing the Judgment and decree of the two Courts below passed in favour of the appellant.

2. The appellant herein shall be described as the plaintiff landlord and the respondent as the defendant tenant hereinafter for the sake of convenience.

3 The plaintiff filed a suit under Section 12(1)(f) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 for eviction of the defendant tenant on the ground of bona fide requirement as he required the suit premises for opening a showroom of Ind-Suzuki motorcycles and TVS 50 mopeds for which he 'was appointed sub-dealer. The trial Court came to the finding that the plaintiff landlord was in bona fide need of the disputed premises for doing his own business and for this purpose no other suitable shop was available to him in the city of Chattarpur. The lower appellate Court after considering the evidence on record upheld the above finding of the trial Court and dismissed the appeal filed by the defendant tenant.

4. The High Court in the second appe

















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