REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

PRABHUDAS DAMODAR KOTECHA Appellant

V/S

Manhabala Jeram Damodar Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

R. V. LOXDALE [REFERRED TO]
M K RANGANATHAN VS. GOVERNMENT OF MADRAS [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BOMBAY VS. HOSPITAL MAZDOOR SABHA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. OKARA GRAIN BUYERS SYNDICATE LTD [REFERRED TO]
SHAH AND CO BOMBAY VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL AND GRINDLAYS BANK LIMITED VS. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER BOMBAY [RELIED UPON]
SOHAN LAL NARAINDAS VS. LAXMIDAS RAGHUNATH GADIT [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. PREM KUMAR JAIN [REFERRED TO]
TATA ENGINEERING AND LOCOMOTIVE COMPANY LIMITED VS. GRAM PANCHAYAT PIMPRI WAGHERE [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF JUSTICE OF ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. L V A DIXITULU:V V S KRISHNAMURTHY [REFERRED TO]
KM SONIA BHATIA VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
BANK OF INDIA VS. VIJAY TRANSPORT [REFERRED TO]
KEHAR SINGHTS VS. STATE DELHI ADMINISTRATION [REFERRED TO]
ROHIT PULP AND PAPER MILLS LIMITED VS. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE BARODA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. BRIGADIER SUKHJIT SINGH [REFERRED TO]
MANSUKHLAL DHANRAJ JAIN VASDEV PRAKASH VS. EKNATH VITHAL OGALE:VIMLA PREMCHAND HINDUJA MRS [RELIED UPON]
SAMATHA HYDERABAD ABRASIVES AND MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SURENDRA KUMAR JAIN VS. ROYCE PEREIRA [REFERRED TO]
BRINDAVAN BANGLE STORES VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES [REFERRED TO]
GURUDEVDATTA VKSSS MARYADIT VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
BHAIJI VS. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFCER THANDLA [REFERRED TO]
CHANDY VARGHESE VS. K ABDUL KHADER [REFERRED TO]
AHMEDABAD PVT PRIMARY TEACHERS ASSOCIATION VS. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER [REFERRED TO]
C M BEENA VS. P N RAMACHANDRA RAO [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH VS. PAWAN KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. BABU RAM [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH DWARKADAS MEHRA VS. INDRAVATI DWARKADAS MEHRA [OVERRULED]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) We are, in these appeals, concerned with the question whether a suit filed by a licensor against a gratuitous licensee under Section 41(1) of the Presidency Small Causes Courts Act, 1882 (for short "the PSCC Act"), as amended by the Maharashtra Act No.XIX of 1976 (for short "1976 Amendment Act") is maintainable before a Small Causes Court, Mumbai. .

(3.) The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Ramesh Dwarikadas Mehra v. Indirawati Dwarika Das Mehra, 2001 AIR(Bom) 470 held that a suit by a licensor against a gratuitous licensee is not tenable before the Presidency Small Causes Court under Section 41 (1) of the PSCC Act, and it should be filed before the City Civil Court or the High Court depending upon the valuation. The Division Bench held that the expression "licensee" used in Section 41(1) of the PSCC Act has the same meaning as in Section 5 (4A) of the Bombay Rents, Hotels and Lodging House Rates (Control) Act, 1947 (in short "the Rent Act"). Further it was held that the expression "licensee" as used in Section 5(4A) does not cover a gratuitous licensee. The Division Bench in that case rejected the ejectment application holding that the Small Causes Court at Bombay lacked jurisdiction.

Click here to view full judgment.

PRABHUDAS DAMODAR KOTECHA Vs. MANHABALA JERAM DAMODAR

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address