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

1992 Supreme(MP) 688

R.D.SHUKLA
Laxminarayan – Appellant
Versus
Jambu Dal Mills – Respondent


Advocates:
R.S. Garg for applicant; N.K. Patni for non-applicant.

ORDER

R.D. Shukla, J. -- 1. This revision is directed against the order dated 6.4.92 passed in Civil Suit No.110-A/89 whereby the plaintiffs three applications; one, for amendment in the pleading, other for amendment in the issues and the third for examination of rent receipts by an expert have been rejected.

2. The brief history of the case is that plaintiff non-applicant filed a suit in the Court of Vth Addl. Distt. Judge, Indore with the assertions that he is the landlord of the suit premises. It is bona fide required by the plaintiff and its partners, that defendant has failed to pay rent @ 2,100/- per month and, therefore, is liable for eviction. It was also asserted that he purchased the suit premises from the heirs of one Shri Hemchandra Mishra on a consideration of Rs. 1,61,000/vide registered deed dated 29.4.87. The suit has been filed on 20.7.89.

3. The defendant denied the assertions of the plaintiff and submitted that plaintiff does not require it for personal need. The defendant denied the relationship of tenant and landlord. It was further asserted that they have never agreed to pay rent @ 2,100/-permonth as he was paying Rs. 350/- per month to previous landlord (Le., pr






























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