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

1978 Supreme(MP) 461

G.L.OZA
Bhurelal – Appellant
Versus
Balmukund – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : B.L. Pavecha
For the Respondent: K.L. Goyal

Short Note :

The plaintiff appellant filed the suit on the allegation that the shop in question along with the land was taken on rent on 18-9-1965 by registered rent-deed for Rs. 9.0 p. per month. It was further alleged by the plaintiff-appellant that in a suit filed by the State and the Princess Usha Trust against the present plaintiff in the Court of the Additional District Judge where the respondent also was a defendant he filed, a written-statement denying the title of the present plaintiff appellant and therefore this suit was filed on the ground under section 12(1)(c) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act. The trial Court dismissed the suit holding that what was alleged in the written-statement by the respondent defendant did not amount to disclaimer of title and therefore no ground under section 12(1)(c) of the Act is made out. The learned lower appellate Court held that although the written-statement filed by the defendant-respondent amounts to disclaimer but the learned Judge maintained the dismissal of the suit on the ground that under section 12(1)(c) of the Act mere disclaimer is not enough. The plaintiff had further to allege that this disclaimer might affect





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