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

1998 Supreme(Guj) 481

D.C.SRIVASTAVA
NARBHERAM AMBALAL – Appellant
Versus
JAYANTILAL DAHYABHAI KHARVA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: N.K.MAJMUDAR, P.B.MAJUMDAR, S.D.PATEL

D. C. SRIVASTAVA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is tenants revision under Sec. 29 (2) of the bombay Rent Act (for short the Rent Act ).

( 2 ) BRIEF facts are that the revisionist was tenant of the respondent in the disputed premises on monthly rent of Rs. 5. 00. The property was purchased by the plaintiff-respondent. He filed Suit No. 554 of 1963 against the revisionist for his eviction which was dismissed. Appeal was also dismissed. Legality of transfer in favour of the respondent was challenged. Therefore, a Deed of Relinquishment was obtained whereafter another Suit No. 1151 of 1967 was filed for declaration that the plaintiff- respondent is owner of the property and the defendant was a tenant. The said suit was decreed. Thereafter, the defendant-revisionist fell in arrears of rent from 3-12-1962. Notice of demand was served, but the rent was not paid nor the premises was vacated. Eviction was sought on the ground that the tenant remained in arrears of rent for more than six months which he failed to pay within a month of service of notice of demand. Eviction was also sought on the ground that the premises was reasonably and bona fide required by the landlord-respondent for his personal use, evi































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