Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (8) TMI 1563

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d rather is a matter of discretion of the Court. Where the Defendants have raised objections which go to the root of the case, it would not be appropriate to exercise the discretion Under Order XII Rule 6 Code of Civil Procedure. The said rule is an enabling provision which confers discretion on the Court in delivering a quick judgment on admission and to the extent of the claim admitted by one of the parties of his opponent's claim. In the suit for eviction filed by the Respondent-landlord, Appellant-tenant has admitted the relationship of tenancy and the period of lease agreement; but resisted Respondent-Plaintiffs claim by setting up a defence plea of agreement to sale and that he paid an advance of Rs. 82.50 lakhs, which of cours .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , Advs. JUDGMENT R. Banumathi, J. Leave granted. 2. Challenge in these appeals is the correctness of the orders dated 16.10.2014 and 27.10.2014 passed by the High Court of Delhi in RFA No. 505/2014, whereby the High Court disposed of the appeal observing that the Appellant having not pressed the appeal and by changing their counsel cannot be allowed to plead for adjournment to argue the appeal. Review Petition No. 499/2014 also came to be dismissed by the High Court vide order dated 19.11.2014 which is also under challenge in these appeals. 3. Brief facts which led to filing of these appeals are as under: Respondent-landlord is the owner of the disputed premises which is a built up area of entire second floor with terrac .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 011. 4. The Respondent-landlord alleges that Under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act terminating the lease, he sent a legal notice through speed post on 26.12.2011; however, the Appellant-tenant denied having received any such notice. As the Defendant-tenant was not vacating the premises, the Respondent-landlord filed a Suit No. 256/13 for recovery of possession, mesne profits and injunction in the Court of Additional District Judge, Tis Hazari, Delhi. During the pendency of the suit, an application Under Order XII Rule 6 Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure was filed by the Respondent-landlord and the trial court vide its order dated 25.08.2014 allowed the said application and directed the Appe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... vide its order dated 30.09.2013, while directing the payment to be made during the pendency of the suit at Rs. 44,000/- per month has stipulated a condition that in the event of the Appellant-tenant succeeding, the monthly amount paid would be adjusted against the balance sale consideration amount under the agreement for sale dated 19.08.2011. It was further submitted that having regard to the defence taken by the Appellant-tenant, the trial court ought to have adjudicated the matter and erred in passing a decree for eviction without trial. It was also submitted that when the matter came up before the High Court of Delhi on 16.10.2014, the Appellant-tenant was not present in the Court and his counsel sought time to take instructions and acc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ropriate to exercise the discretion Under Order XII Rule 6 Code of Civil Procedure. The said rule is an enabling provision which confers discretion on the Court in delivering a quick judgment on admission and to the extent of the claim admitted by one of the parties of his opponent's claim. In the suit for eviction filed by the Respondent-landlord, Appellant-tenant has admitted the relationship of tenancy and the period of lease agreement; but resisted Respondent-Plaintiffs claim by setting up a defence plea of agreement to sale and that he paid an advance of Rs. 82.50 lakhs, which of course is stoutly denied by the Respondent-landlord. The Appellant-Defendant also filed the Suit for Specific Performance, which of course is contested .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates