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

1965 Supreme(MP) 159

Shivdayal
Nagendra Singh – Appellant
Versus
Jaidev Satpathy – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.P. Sen and N.C. Mishra for applicant; S.C. Pandey for non-applicant.

ORDER

1. This revision arises from an order passed by the trial Court holding that the State of Madhya Pradesh is a necessary party to the suit and directing the plaintiff to join the State Government as a party. Aggrieved by that order, the plaintiff has come up in revision.

2. To state briefly, the plaintiffs case is that the Phuljhar Sewa Samiti, a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, is in occupation of the suit accommodation as tenant on Rs. 150/- per month. A total sum of Rs. 11,500/- was received by the plaintiff. The defendant tenant is in arrears of rent to the extent of Rs. 5,400/-. The plaintiff claims a decree for ejectment and for arrears of rent.

3. It also stated in the plaint that at the time that the suit accommodation was given on lease to the defendant-society, it was agreed that in case the society paid Rs. 16,000/- in all to the plaintiff within three years of the defendant's entering into possession of the suit accommodation the plaintiff-would execute a deed of sale in respect of it, in favour of the society. However, the society paid only Rs. 11,500- not the entire sum of Rs. 16,000/-. The amount thus receive was adjusted towards rent.

4. Res



















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