Back
RAJENDRA MAHAJAN
Arjundas (Dead) through L. R. Lekhraj Rawal – Appellant
Versus
Kapil Udyog Through Satya Prakash Mehrotra (Dead) through LRs. Smt. Savitri Mehra – Respondent
1. The plaintiff No.1 appellant has filed this first appeal under section 96 rw Order 41 rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree dated 20.3.2003 passed by the Third Additional District Judge Gwalior in Civil Suit No. 137A of 1994, whereby, the civil suit for recovery of possession and arrears of license fee has been dismissed with costs.
2. The case of the plaintiff's before the trial Court, in short, is that they are owner of a parcel of land measuring 30 ft.X166.5 ft. total area 4995 sq.ft (for short `the suit land') located in Kishan Bagh Bahodapur Gwalior. The suit land adjoins with other agricultural lands of their ownership, the details of which are given in para 1 of the plaint. The map of suit land with the directions is also attached with the plaint. On 6.7.1988, they had given the suit land to defendant Satya Prakash on license on the license fee of Rs.1,500/- (Fifteen hundreds) per month for the use of his industry known as Kapil Udyog for a period of 11 months with other terms and conditions. On that day, he had given them Rs.5,000/- (five thousand) in advance towards license fee. In this respect, an agreement is executed between pl
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
