Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Udai Chand Versus Shankar Lal and Ors.

1978 (2) TMI 224 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Miscellaneous Petition No. 8783 of 1977 - Dated:- 7-2-1978 - M. Hameedullah Beg, D.A. Desai and P.N. Bhagwati For the Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Badridas Sharma and S.R. Srivastava, Advs For the Respondents/Defendant: L.M. Singhvi, S.M. Jain, Dalveer Bhandari and S. K. Jain, Advs. JUDGMENT M. Hameedullah Beg, J. 1. The plaintiff landlord had purchased a shop by a sale deed dated 17th May, 1965, and then terminated the tenancy of the defendant-petitioner by a registered notice in July, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

-in-interest of the plaintiff landlord who had also notified the defendant petitioner of the sale in. favour of the plaintiff by a registered notice dated 25th June, 1965, received by the defendant petitioner on 29th June, 1965. The defendant petitioner pleaded having taken the shop from another individual, Mahant Ram Ratan Das. 3. In the course of litigation, the defendant-petitioner had asked for an-issue to-be framed on the question whether there was legal necessity for the transfer in favour .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rejection was that, as the defendant-petitioner had obtained possession under a tenancy from Bhurdas, the predecessor-in-interest of the present landlord, Surajmal, the defendant-petitioner Udai Chand, Was estopped from questioning the title of his landlord by reason of the principle laid down in Section 116 of the Evidence Act. 4. Ultimately, upon the decree for eviction, the defendant-petitioner had again challenged the view that he was estopped from questioning the title of Bhurdas. On this .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

showing that the defendant had admitted that the-shop was owned by Bhurdas. to whom he would pay rent. The defendant-petitioner's- second appeal was, therefore, dismissed by the High Court. 5. The defendant-petitioner then filed a special leave petition in this Court under Article 136. Ground No. 7 of the grounds of special leave petition was : That the Hon'ble Court should have appreciated that the rent note Ext. 10 nowhere states that Bhoordas Was the owner of the house and hence the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

copy of the rent deed Ex. 10, A perusal of it shows that there was a specific mention of Bhurdas as the owner of the shop in dispute which the defendant petitioner had taken on rent. Hence, there could be no getting away from the fact that the defendant petitioner had made a clearly false and misleading assertion in his special leave petition. We fail to see what point other than the applicability of Section 116 of the Evidence Act could possibly arise in the case. The whole case was concluded b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

8. We have heard learned Counsel for both sides. Learned Counsel for the defendant petitioner is unable to give any explanation for the false assertion in ground No. VII of his special leave petition except that the learned Counsel had himself misunderstood the document, because of other facts in the case. We are unable to accept this flimsy explanation as a sufficient justification for the false assertion. 9. Reference was made by the learned Counsel for the respondents to The King v. Williams .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

v. Badri Das [1964]2SCR203 , where Gajendragadkar, J., speaking for this Court said (at p. 209) : In dealing with applications for special leave, the Court naturally takes, statements of fact and grounds of fact contained in the petitions at their face value and it would be unfair to betray the confidence of the Court by making statements which are untrue and misleading. In that case, this Court revoked the grant of special leave despite the fact that Mr. Setalvad, who had argued the special le .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in exceptional cases, when a substantial question of law falls to be determined or where it appears to the Court that interference by this Court is necessary to remedy serious injustice. A party who approaches this Court invoking the exercises of this overriding discretion of the Court must come with clean hands. If there appears on his part any attempt to overreach or mislead the Court by false or untrue statements or by with holding true information which would have a bearing on the question o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version