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

2006 Supreme(MP) 606

A.K.SHRIVASTAVA
Raj Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Radhey Shyam – Respondent


Advocates:
Rakesh Jain for appellants.

JUDGMENT

1. This second appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs against the impugned judgment and decree dated 25.3.1992 passed by the 1st Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Tikamgarh in Civil Appeal No. 4-A/91, whereby the judgment and decree dated 12.12.1990 passed by 1st Civil Judge, Class II, Tikamgarh has been reversed and set aside and the suit of the plaintiffs has been dismissed.

2. The plaintiffs/appellants filed a suit against the defendants/ respondents praying therein that their father Moolchand was a tenant of the suit shop owned by Municipality, Tikamgarh and after the death of their father on 13.12.1985, being sons they inherited the tenancy right and by holding over the tenancy right they are tenants of defendant No.2. The plaintiffs further prayed that defendant No. l/respondent No.1 be directed to deliver possession of the suit shop to them.

3. According to the plaint averments the suit shop was taken by Moolchand, who was father of the plaintiffs and there was relationship of landlord and tenant between Moolchand and the Municipality. This relationship is also mentioned and maintained in the record of the Municipality. In the month of Ap






















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