Sunday, 25 October 2020

Questions and answers in law part 12

Q.1 What is limitation for filing suit for eviction against tenant on ground of subletting?
Ans:- After hearing both the learned Counsel, and after perusal of the Trial Court judgment and the lower Appellate Court judgment, it is clear that in the instant case, though the tenancy was created in favour of Respondent No. 1, the Respondent No. 1 never stayed in the suit premises, right from inception, i.e. 1st February, 1969. On the contrary, the Respondent No. 1 had illegally sub-let the same to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 from 1st February, 1969. If that be so, the breach of tenancy conditions occurred on 1st February, 1969, and the suit ought to have been filed within 12 years, as per Article 66 of the Limitation Act. Ex-facie the suit is barred by law of limitation. 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

Writ Petition No. 684 of 1991

Decided On: 05.12.2006

 Shri Taherbhai Taiyebhai Poonawala, Vs.  Shri G. Hamid Hasan Patel 
Hon'ble Judges: 
Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, J.

Citation: AIR 2007 Bom 80.
Read full judgment here: Click here

Q 2 Whether revision filed before appellate court of small cause court can be dismissed in default if party fails to appear before court?

Ans:- However, the Learned Counsel for the Respondents urged that, although there is a rule about restoration to file of a revision petition dismissed in default, there is no similar rule for setting aside an ex-parte order passed in a civil revision. Therefore, the contention is that this Court has no jurisdiction to set aside an ex parte order. In my opinion, a resort to exercise of inherent powers would be necessary to meet such a situation; otherwise we are led to the anomalous situation created by the view as expressed by Byers J. in A. Rirnxmwrti Iyer and Ors. v. T.A. Meenakshisundarammil and Anr. (Supra), as this Court would have the power to do damage to a party, but would be supposed not to undo it. 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (INDORE BENCH)

Misc. Civil Case No. 94 of 1963

Decided On: 12.12.1963

 Dhullchand Bhuraji  Vs.   Chainsingh Bachusingh and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
P.K. Tare, J.

Citation: 1965 JLJ 997,= ILR (1966) MP 169=1966 MP LJ 65, MANU/MP/0146/1963
Read full judgment here: Click here

Q. 
Whether court can issue heirship certificate after so many years of passing of order of grant of heirship certificate?

Ans:- Usually, a heirship certificate is issued in the name of the applicant by recognizing him as an heir of the deceased in respect of management of some immovable property. Thereafter, the applicant is required to furnish the requisite court -fees stamp as per valuation on which the certificate is typed. Unless, it is supplied there is no question of "issuance'' of heirship certificate though the application is allowed. So if an applicant appears after 5 years ,he/she will have to explain the delay satisfactorily and may be required to file MANRJE/MJC and then only, the certificate can be issued. Therefore, there is no bar or period of limitation to issue it.

Print Page

No comments:

Post a comment