Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.29 seconds)
Documents citing Shri Tran Devadi Mandir Trust And Ors. vs Dilipkumar Babulal Shah And Anr. on 13 July, 1983

Yakubhai Ahmedji Mistri vs Imamuddin Husenuddin Kadri on 30 January, 1991

In the case of Tran Devadi Mandir Trust v. Dilipkumar Babulal, reported in 1984 Guj LH 259, the standard rent had been determined by a consent decree passed earlier. A subsequent application for such determination was held to be maintainable on the basis that the earlier decision was found to be vitiated by fraud practiced upon the tenant in obtaining his consent. In effect, therefore, there was no earlier legal and valid decision. and, therefore, there was no question of the bar created by S. 11 of the Civil Procedure Code.
Gujarat High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Brahmanand Layakram vs Shah Natwarlal Harakhlal on 25 February, 2000

9. One is Shri Tran Devadi Mandir Trust & Ors. v. Dilipkumar Babulal Shah & Ors., reported in 1984 (2) GLR 938 : 1984 GLH 259. This case is distinguishable on facts. Here it was clearly laid down that if the standard rent was fixed on the basis of consent term which is unlawful and tainted with fraud, no such plea can be raised. Principle of estoppel did not apply to cases where consent was unlawful and was not free and valid. In the case before me, nothing has been argued that the consent term was unlawful or it was tainted with fraud, coersion, illegallity, etc. The other case relied upon by Shri Vyas is Mis.
Gujarat High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - D C Srivastava - Full Document

Jiviben Purushottambhai Dave W/O ... vs Mehta Cycle & Auto Stores on 14 September, 2018

7. Mr. Karia, therefore, is right in his submission that assuming that a decree obtained by fraud can be set aside, based on the judgements relied upon by Mr. Ravani the facts of the case on hand would suggest that the tenant did not move for more than two years to come forward and allege fraud. The judgement in the case of (Shri) Tran Devadi Mandir Trust (supra) as rightly contended by Mr. Karia is not applicable to the facts of the present case inasmuch as in the said case the application to set aside the consent terms was made within a short time. In the facts of the present case, it is evident that such an application was moved after three years and that too after the landlord issued a notice for arrears of rent. The action of the tenant was therefore clearly an afterthought.
Gujarat High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - B Vaishnav - Full Document
1