REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

GIRIJA SHANKAR Appellant

V/S

SHEELA DEVI Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

DAKSHINAMURTHI MUDALIAR V. DHANAKOTI AMMAL [REFERRED TO]
A.M.A. SULTAN V. SEYDU ZOHRA BEEVI [REFERRED TO]
NATHULAL VS. PHOOLCHAND [REFERRED TO]
P VEERAPPA VS. M A MOHAMMAD AMANULLA [REFERRED TO]
P VEERAPPA VS. M A MOHAMMAD AMANULLA [REFERRED TO]
RAGHUNATH G PANHALE VS. CHAGANLAL SUNDARJI [REFERRED TO]
D S PARVATHAMMA VS. A SRINIVASAN [REFERRED TO]
SHAKUNTALA BAI VS. NARAYAN DAS [REFERRED TO]
SHAKUNTALA BAI VS. NARAYAN DAS [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. ATUL FASTENERS LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
JOSEPH KANTHARAJ VS. ATTHARUNNISA BEGUM [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF TAMIL NADU VS. A MANICKAM PILLAI [REFERRED TO]
SHESHAMBAL VS. CHELUR CORPORATION CHELUR BUILDING [REFERRED TO]
SESHAMBAL VS. CHELUR CORPORATION CHELUR BUILDING [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWANDAS PARSADILAL VS. SURAJMAL [REFERRED TO]
PUSKAR SHARMA VS. SUDHA MISHRA [REFERRED TO]
PUSKAR SHARMA VS. SUDHA MISHRA [REFERRED TO]
NISAR AHMAD QURESHI VS. HAZRA BEGAM WD/O DR I A KHAN [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is defendant's first appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the C.P.C.') against the Judgment and Decree dated 30-01-2004 passed by the Second Additional District Judge, Durg in Civil Appeal No. 5A of 2002 whereby and where under the plaintiff's suit filed for eviction of the appellant has been decreed.

(2.) To appreciate the controversy raised in the appeal, a few relevant facts may be stated.

(3.) Smt. Savita Devi owned a plot at station road, Durg, having dimension of 126 feet on the north, 90 feet on the south, 60.9 feet on the east and 60 feet on the west (hereinafter referred to as the suit accommodation). Late Aditya Narayan Tiwari was a tenant on this plot on a monthly rent of Rs. 100/- and he was running saw mill there.

Click here to view full judgment.

GIRIJA SHANKAR Vs. SHEELA DEVI

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address