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

1998 Supreme(MP) 785

A.K.MATHUR, DIPAK MISRA
Shanti Devi Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
Punjab National Bank – Respondent


Advocates:
Ravish Agarwal with Bashant Mishra for appellants; J.P. Sanghi for respondent.

ORDER

Mathur, C.J. -- 1. This is a reference made by the learned single Judge holding that the question raised in the First Appeal is of an importance; therefore, it may be decided by the Division Bench, though the question of law has not been framed by the learned single Judge. However, whenever question is referred to the Larger Bench, question of law should be framed and then it should be referred to the Larger Bench. Since the question of law was not framed by the learned Single Judge, we shall frame a proper question. after narration of few necessary facts.

2. A suit was filed by the plaintiffs/appellants. There is a house existing on plot No. 8/1 and 9 measuring 400 sq. ft. The suit premises was rented out by the plaintiffs to the defendant-Bank on monthly rent of Rs. 4537.50 paise. The suit premises was previously owned by Bhagwanji Amarsi Chatwani and thereafter, the suit premises were purchased by the plaintiffs. It is alleged that the plaintiffs required the suit premises in order to start their business.

3. The suit was resisted by the defendant-Bank. It is alleged that the suit premises originally belonged to one Swami Bhagwanji Amarsi and it was rented out by him to the B














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