Back
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J
Jagannath More – Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Mahadu Bhagvat – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition initiated by landlords against encroachment by tenant. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. court findings on tenant's possession and size of the premises. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 3. significance of documentary evidence validating tenant's possession. (Para 10 , 14) |
| 4. landlords' right to amend decree and judicial standards for justice. (Para 11 , 12 , 22) |
| 5. court allows writ petition and affirms decision for correcting the decree. (Para 24) |
1. Rule.
2. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard. finally with the consent of the parties.
3. Petitioners-Landlords are decree holders. Their Civil Miscellaneous Application No.184 / 2018, seeking for corrections in the decree was rejected on 12th July, 2019 by learned District Judge – I, Nashik. Against this order, Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is preferred.
4. Briefly stated Petitioners’ case is;
Petitioners-Landlords sought decree to recover possession of the suit property ad-measuring 5 x 3 square meters, of house no. 434 at Nashik, for their bonafide and reasonable need. Landlords alleged the tenant/ respondent, encroached upon and erected permanent structure, beyond the area of suit property. Thus alleged tenant
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
