LIVE Online Course on NDPS by Riva Pocha and Adv. Taraq Sayed. Starting from 24th May. Register Now!!
LAW Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

EVICTION OF TENANT

(Querist) 07 January 2009 This query is : Resolved 
i want a case law on eviction of tenant.
where " there is no agreement to construct by tenant, not entitiled for cost and liable to be ejected"

one of my suggested a link but could not give me the full details of the case law
1997 lawsuit 538, 1997 SCC 530.

please someone could help by giving full case law details?
PALNITKAR V.V. (Expert) 07 January 2009



[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]

Karuna Ram Medhi and Others
v
Kamakhya Prasad Baruah and Nr


K. Ramaswamy, G. T. Nanavati & K. Venkataswami

25 Apr 1997

BENCH
K. Ramaswamy, G. T. Nanavati & K. Venkataswami

COMPARATIVE CITATIONS
1997 (5) SCC 530, 1997 (2) CLT 378, 1997 (1) RCR 528, 1997 (3)
Scale 547, 1997 (2) SCJ 246, 1997 (4) JT 653, 1997 (5) Supreme
104, 1997 (1) RentLR 525, 1997 INDLAW SC 1156

CASES REFERRED TO
Pramila Rani Nag v Mohd. Mir Hussain And Others 1995 Indlaw SC
1445
Canara Bank v Canara Sales Corporation and Others 1987 Indlaw
SC 28893
Venkatlal G. Pittie And Another v Bright Bros. (Pvt.) Ltd 1987
Indlaw SC 28326
Shiromani and Others v Hem Kumar and Others 1968 Indlaw SC 376
Rafiquennessa v Lal Bahadur Chetri (Dead) Through His
Representatives And 1964 Indlaw SC 108
Karam Singh Sobti and Another v Shri Pratap Chand and Another
1963 Indlaw SC 369

ACTS REFERRED
Assam Non-Agricultural Urban Areas Tenancy Act, 1955


.JUDGMENT TEXT

The Judgment was delivered by K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI,
K.VENKATASWAMI

JUDGMENT:

THE 2ND DAY OFAPRIL, 1997

Present: Hon'ble Mr.Justice K.Ramaswamy Hon'ble Mr.Justice
D.P.Wadhwa

Pravir Choudhary, Adv. for the appellant.

S.A. Syed and S.K. Nandy, Advs.for the Respondents.

O R D E R The following order of the court was delivered:

O R D E R

Substitution allowed.

This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the
Full Bench of the High Court of Assam, made on 24.8;.1982 in
S.A. No. 58 of 1976.

The admitted facts are that the respondent had entered into
and agreement of lease of land with the predecessor-in- title
of the appellant on January 5, 1953 for a period of seven
years on payment of premium o f Rs.30/- p.a. The respondent
constructed house the rein within five years from the date of
the lease. The house was gutted in afire on April 4, 1958 and
there after the respondent reconstructed the house. The
appellant had issued a notice on December 12, 1959asking the
respondent to vacate the land and deliver the possession on
January 1, 1960.The respondent has resisted the contentions
raised in the suit filed by the appellant for ejectment of the
respondent from the demised property. The trial Court decreed
the suit. On appeal, the Additional District Judge confirmed
the same. In the second Appeal , the Full Bench of the High
Court reversed the decree of the trial Court and dismissed the
suit. Thus this appeal by special leave.

Shri Prabir Chowdhury , learned counsel for the appellants,
with his painstaking preparation, has contended strenuously
that the High Court is wrong in coming to the conclusion that
the respondent had constructed the house with permission of
the predecessor of the appellant. The respon


You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .


Click here to login now



Similar Resolved Queries :





Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query