SUPREME COURT
Unknown, J
Shanti Prasad (D) Thr. Lrs v. Thakur Dass (D) Thr. Lrs
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. service of notice is sufficient despite non-appearance. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. compliance with deposit provisions is crucial for tenant protection. (Para 6 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. tenant's rights affirmed despite claimed rent discrepancies. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 4. appeal allowed, eviction decree set aside. (Para 13 , 14) |
1. Matter is called out.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant is present but none is present for the respondents.
3. There are 11 respondents in this appeal. As per office report, respondent nos.1(i) to (vi), 3 and 5 are served but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. Respondent nos. 2 and 4 have refused to accept notice. Notice upon respondent no.6 was served as per Certificate of Service received from the High Court. Respondent nos.7 to 11 have refused to accept the notice and, therefore, notices have been affixed at their residence.
4. In view of the above, service of notice on the respondents is held sufficient.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and have perused the record.
6. The appellant is a tenant. A suit for recovery of arrears of rent and eviction was instituted against the appellant after determining the tenancy inter alia on th
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.