Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.39 seconds)
Shri. Manojkumar Jagatrai Virani And ... vs M/S. Kanoria Brothers And Ors on 21 April, 2016 cites

M/S. Marshall Sons & Co.(I) Ltd vs M/S.Sahi Oretrans (P) Ltd. And Anr on 29 January, 1999

32. The Supreme Court adverted to its earlier judgment in case of Marshall Sons & Co. (I) Ltd. vs. Sahi Oretrans (P) Ltd. (1999) 2 SCC 325 in which it was held that once a decree for possession has been passed and execution is delayed depriving the judgment-creditor of the fruits of decree, it is necessary for the court to pass appropriate orders so that reasonable mesne profits which may be equivalent to the market rent is paid by a person who is holding over the property. It is held that the doctrine of merger does not have the effect of postponing the date of termination of tenancy merely because the decree of eviction stands merged in the decree passed by the superior forum at a latter date.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 117 - M B Shah - Full Document

Chandrakant Dhanu vs Sharmila Kapur on 7 January, 2009

46. Insofar as valuation report submitted by the petitioner is concerned, a perusal of the said report also indicates that the said valuer has not considered any part of the area of open lawn and garden admeasuring 4505 sq.ft. which was also being enjoyed by the petitioner. This court in case of Chandrakant Dhanu & Anr. (supra) has held that the court has to consider the facilities in the premises and outside the premises, advantages and disadvantages, location/area of the premises also while determining the compensation. The petitioner does not dispute that there is open lawn and garden admeasuring about 4505 sq.ft. being enjoyed by the petitioner. In my view fact of enjoyment of such open lawn and garden by the petitioner alongwith the suit property will also have to be considered while determining the compensation which will have 26/35 ::: Uploaded on - 21/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 22/04/2016 00:00:18 ::: cra345-14c bearing on the quantum of compensation to be determined by this court. Judgment of this court in case of Chandrakant Dhanu & Anr.
Bombay High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 12 - A V Mohta - Full Document
1