Skip to content


Shantimoy Das Vs. Indu Bhushan De and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectTenancy
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Appeal No. 276 of 1974
Judge
Reported inAIR1981SC521; 1980Supp(1)SCC343; 1980(12)LC800(SC)
AppellantShantimoy Das
Respondentindu Bhushan De and ors.
Excerpt:
.....arbitrator without ascertaining whether dispute exists between parties held, it is not permissible. moreso when under condition of contract sole arbitrator could be serving officer having degree in engineering or equivalent. - ghosh for the appellant we are satisfied that the submission which merits consideration is as to the time that we should grant to him for vacating the premises, having regard to the circumstance that he has been in long possession and he has continued in possession by resourceful litigation since 1964. shri majumdar counters the submission for time because rents are in arrears and the appellant has been clinging to possession for too long. 2. we have addressed ourselves to the rival submissions and feel satisfied that if the appellants given an undertaking..........grant to him for vacating the premises, having regard to the circumstance that he has been in long possession and he has continued in possession by resourceful litigation since 1964. shri majumdar counters the submission for time because rents are in arrears and the appellant has been clinging to possession for too long.2. we have addressed ourselves to the rival submissions and feel satisfied that if the appellants given an undertaking within one month from today containing two conditions, voilation of which will involve instant eviction and proceedings for breach of undertaking, he will be given a period of one year from today, that it upto 6th august, 1980 for vacating possession. the conditions are:(a) that he will within three months from today deposit in the trial court the.....
Judgment:

V.R. Krishna Iyer, J.

1. Having heard Mr. Ghosh for the appellant we are satisfied that the submission which merits consideration is as to the time that we should grant to him for vacating the premises, having regard to the circumstance that he has been in long possession and he has continued in possession by resourceful litigation since 1964. Shri Majumdar counters the submission for time because rents are in arrears and the appellant has been clinging to possession for too long.

2. We have addressed ourselves to the rival submissions and feel satisfied that if the appellants given an undertaking within one month from today containing two conditions, voilation of which will involve instant eviction and proceedings for breach of undertaking, he will be given a period of one year from today, that it upto 6th August, 1980 for vacating possession. The conditions are:

(a) That he will within three months from today deposit in the trial Court the entire arrears of rents and continue to pay rent for every month by the 15th of the succeeding month;

(b) That lie will give vacant possession on or before the date we have filed and see that he will not alienate or otherwise put in possession of the premises or part thereof any person other than himself.

3. In case the undertaking is not filed in time or if any of the conditions in the undertaking is broken then there will be instant eviction. Subject to these conditions and filing of the undertaking we dismiss the appeal.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //