Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.26 seconds)

Mohanlal Bhagwandas vs Ishwarlal Ambaram - Died During ... on 6 May, 2014

8. On the other hand, learned advocate Ms.K.J.Brahmbhatt for the respondent has supported the order under challenge. It was submitted that initially the suit property was let out to the petitioner only for the business purpose. However, as the petitioner's business has expanded, the other family members joined the petitioner and they also started to reside at the Page 4 of 13 C/SCA/2327/2009 JUDGMENT tenanted premises. It was also submitted that ground of non- user came only in 2008 and therefore, filing of the application for amendment by the plaintiff - when the suit was pending - was just and proper and order of the trial court does not call for any interference. Learned advocate for the respondent has drawn attention to a decision in the case of Pankaja and Anr. v. Yellappa (Dead) by LRs and Ors., reported in (2004) 6 SCC 415, Ganpat Lal Gupta and Ors. v. Vth Additional District Judge, Deoria District and Ors., reported in 2003 AIHC 4870 (Allhabad), Potnuru Lakshmana Rao v. Potnuru Babu Rao (died) by LRs., reported in 2001 AISC 2814 and in case of Shanabhai Mangabhai Patel v. Bhagwandas Revabhai Patel and Ors., reported in 1990 (1) GLH 403.
Gujarat High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - R D Kothari - Full Document

Smt. Sunita Khanna And Ors vs Sh. Prithvi Raj Jandoria And Others on 22 December, 2007

The reference made in the case of N.V Srinivasa Murthy & Ors. Vs. Mariyamma reported in AIR 2005 SC 2897, C.A Balakrishnan Vs. Commissioner Corporation of Madras reported in AIR 2003 Madras 170, SNP Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs World tanker Carrier Corpn. reported in AIR 2000 Bom 34 as well as Ganpat Lal Gupta & Ors. Vs. Vth Add. Dist. Judge Deoria, Dist. reported in 2003 ALL.L.J. 2423 are not applicable to the present facts and circumstances of the case and as such not relevant for the purpose of disposal of the application and accepting the plea as taken in the application by the defendant. The application as such is dismissed.
Delhi District Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1