B V PATANKAR Vs. C G SASTRY
LAWS(SC)-1960-9-26
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on September 08,1960

B.V.PATANKAR Appellant
VERSUS
C.G.SASTRY Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

S N SUNDERSON AND CO VS. HARBANS SINGH SOBTI AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [LAWS(DLH)-1971-9-19] [REFERRED]
STATE OF U P VS. MAHENDRA TRIPATHI [LAWS(ALL)-1983-8-4] [REFERRED TO]
PARMESHWAR GOND DECD VS. IIND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE DEORIA [LAWS(ALL)-1998-5-8] [REFERRED TO]
KAREDLA SEETHARAMAIAH VS. DURVASULA YAGNESWARA RAO [LAWS(APH)-1980-8-11] [REFERRED TO]
DEVURI APPALA RAJU VS. KOLLI RAMAYAMMA [LAWS(APH)-1982-9-16] [REFERRED TO]
KERALA TRANSPORT CO VS. ATUL KUMAR AGARWAL [LAWS(APH)-1985-8-15] [REFERRED TO]
CH RAMA CHANDER RAO VS. P MALLESHAM [LAWS(APH)-2002-10-20] [REFERRED TO]
RAMVILAS BAJAJ VS. ASHOK KUMAR [LAWS(APH)-2007-4-12] [REFERRED TO]
RAMVILAS BAJAJ VS. ASHOK KUMAR [LAWS(APH)-2007-4-46] [REFERRED TO]
D NARAYANA GOWDA VS. I N KRISHNA MADYATHA [LAWS(KAR)-1975-7-31] [REFERRED TO]
M M JAMADHAR VS. AMIRBI [LAWS(KAR)-1984-8-49] [REFERRED TO]
KUMARAN NAIR VS. MARIAPPAN PILLAI [LAWS(KER)-1966-11-23] [REFERRED TO]
A KRISHNASWAMI VS. S RASHEEDA [LAWS(MAD)-1980-1-32] [REFERRED TO]
USHA GHOSH VS. RABINDRA NATH DAS [LAWS(CAL)-1991-4-9] [REFERRED TO]
RAJA RAM VS. BHAGWAN DAS [LAWS(ALL)-1972-7-8] [REFERRED TO]
INDIRA DEY VS. ANUKUL CHANDRA CHATTERJEE [LAWS(CAL)-1992-7-10] [REFERRED TO]
G PANNEERSELVAN VS. RENT CONTROLLER VII JUDGE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES MADRAS [LAWS(MAD)-1982-3-25] [REFERRED TO]
MADRAS WINES VS. B ABRAHAM [LAWS(MAD)-1984-12-18] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH BABU VS. S SUSHEELA THIMMEGOWDA [LAWS(KAR)-1998-11-66] [REFERRED TO]
ASHIT BARAN CHATTERJEE VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-1997-3-22] [REFERRED TO]
S RAMIAH VS. ARIYAKUDI KALYANA KRISHNA HOSPITAL TRUST [LAWS(MAD)-1987-11-39] [REFERRED TO]
E MOHANLAL VS. S M THIRUMALAI CHETTIAR [LAWS(MAD)-1989-1-52] [REFERRED TO]
BHARATH KUMAR JAIN VS. KANTA BEN [LAWS(MAD)-1997-9-38] [REFERRED TO]
BHAURAO VS. SAVITRIBAI [LAWS(BOM)-1990-8-75] [REFERRED TO]
K BALAKRISHNA RAO VS. HAJI ABDULLA SAIT [LAWS(SC)-1979-10-19] [REFERRED TO]
EAST INDIA CORPORATION LIMITED VS. MEENAKSHI MILLS LIMITED [LAWS(SC)-1991-4-23] [DISTINGUISHED]
DEVI DAYAL TEXTILE CO VS. NAND LAL [LAWS(DLH)-1976-5-3] [REFERRED]
RAM LOCHAN VS. MAHADEO PRASAD SINGH [LAWS(ALL)-1970-4-24] [REFERRED TO]
KONATHALA SRIAMULU VS. BOARD OF REVENUE C T HYDERABAD [LAWS(APH)-1964-8-18] [REFERRED TO]
AMTUL QUAY YUM HUMSIRA VS. MUNAWAR FATHIMA [LAWS(APH)-2001-7-19] [REFERRED TO]
SITARAM SRIGOPAL VS. UNION CARBIDE INDIA LTD [LAWS(CAL)-1973-1-16] [REFERRED TO]
CHHITU VS. MATHURALAL [LAWS(MPH)-1979-12-6] [REFERRED TO]
HAMEED AND HAMEED ENTERPRISES VS. NICKYS PARLOUR [LAWS(KAR)-1989-1-14] [REFERRED TO]
HEMANT M NABAR VS. FAROHAR AND CO [LAWS(BOM)-2001-3-14] [REFERRED TO]
PRAMOD KEDARNATH GANDHI VS. DILIP SHANKARRAO [LAWS(BOM)-2004-7-213] [REFERRED TO]
HARIGANGABEN PUROHIT VS. V SHAHJAHAN [LAWS(MAD)-2010-7-486] [REFERRED TO]
DARSHAN LAL VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-1978-11-11] [REFERRED TO]
HEMRAJ VS. SURAJMAL [LAWS(RAJ)-1971-8-16] [REFERRED TO]
DEVENDRA NARAIN SINGH VS. SHIVA KUMAR PRASAD SINGH [LAWS(PAT)-1970-5-17] [REFERRED TO]
BHAWESH MISHRA VS. PRESIDENT OF BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION [LAWS(PAT)-1970-5-14] [REFERRED TO]
TIPAN RAUT VS. RAJ KUMAR SINGH [LAWS(PAT)-1976-4-13] [REFERRED TO]
JUGAL KISHORE SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIALAKSHMI KUMARI [LAWS(PAT)-1980-2-3] [REFERRED TO]
MUNGA DEVI VS. INDRASHAN DEVI [LAWS(PAT)-2004-1-26] [REFERRED TO]
P. ANIL VS. DEVAKI [LAWS(KER)-1990-2-60] [REFERRED TO]
RAM PRAKASH AGARWAL VS. GOPI KRISHNAN [LAWS(SC)-2013-4-96] [REFERRED TO]
Chandrakanta VS. Mahesh Brothers [LAWS(MPH)-1997-12-23] [REFERRED TO]
MAHALAKSHMI VS. SENATHI NA. VENKITASALAPATHI AYYER [LAWS(MAD)-2014-8-50] [REFERRED TO]
INDHUMATHI VS. SENATHI NA.VENKITASALAPATHI AYYER & [LAWS(MAD)-2014-8-166] [REFERRED TO]
KAIRU @ KAI KISAN AND ANR. VS. SMT. MUNKI KISANI AND ORS. [LAWS(ORI)-1990-4-38] [REFERRED TO]
HAJI ABDULLAH SAIT VS. K. SANJEEVI RAO [LAWS(MAD)-1979-2-55] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDANMAL SRIVASTAVA VS. MANSINGH [LAWS(RAJ)-2014-12-104] [REFERRED TO]
SIEMENS PUBLIC COMMUNICATION NETWORK VS. SUKHANLAL MEMORIAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY [LAWS(DLH)-2009-7-379] [REFERRED TO]
PRAFULLA CHANDRA BEZBARUAH VS. CALCUTTA CREDIT CORPORATION AND ANR. [LAWS(GAU)-1964-9-6] [REFERRED TO]
T.P. ABDUL KHADAR AND ORS. VS. RAJAMMAL AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-1979-6-44] [REFERRED TO]
RAM LOCHAN VS. MAHADEO PRASAD SINGH AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-1970-5-19] [REFERRED TO]
M. GOVINDASWAMI PILLAI VS. R. VENKATARATHNA MUDALIAR AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-1965-10-34] [REFERRED TO]
MATADIN S/O. SUKHU CASTE KURMI, R/O. VILLAGE BIRPUR, PARGANA ARAIL, DIST. ALLAHABAD VS. BOARD OF REVENUE U.P. ALLAHABAD AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-1965-10-34] [REFERRED TO]
KANHAI SINGH AND OTHERS VS. LACHMAN SINGH AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-1979-4-92] [REFERRED TO]
SIMON VARGHESE VS. KIDANGOOR INDUSTRIES REID PRODUCTS EMPLOYEES CO [LAWS(KER)-2005-5-41] [REFERRED TO]
L.RS. OF SHESHKARAN VS. L.RS. OF KAMLESH RAMSNEHI [LAWS(RAJ)-2005-9-111] [REFERRED TO]
SHANKER LAL VS. GANGA BAI [LAWS(RAJ)-1992-11-68] [REFERRED]
ATUL CHANDRA SARDAR VS. PRAMILA BALA DASL AND ANR [LAWS(CAL)-1982-1-27] [REFERRED]
AMAR SARJIT SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-1967-11-41] [REFERRED]
KARNAL KAITHAL CO-OPERATIVE TRANSPORT SOCIETY LTD VS. DIGAMBER JAIN SOCIETY (REGD ) KARNAL [LAWS(P&H)-1969-12-41] [REFERRED]
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND VS. KUMAON STONE CRUSHER [LAWS(SC)-2017-9-108] [REFERRED TO]
KONATHALA SRIRAMULU AND OTHERS VS. BOARD OF REVENUE (C. T.) [LAWS(APH)-1962-2-30] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This appeal has little substance and must, therefore, be dismissed. The appellants are the decree-holders and the respondent is the judgments-debtor. On February 3, 1941, by a registered deed the father of the appellants leased to the respondent the house in dispute for a period of 10 years with an option of renewal for further periods for as long as the respondent wanted. This house was used by the respondent for his hotel.
(2.)The father died on January 25, 1945. On December 21, 1945, the appellants filed a suit for a declaration that the deed of lease of February 3, 1941, executed by their father was not for legal necessity or for the benefit of the family, that the alienation was not binding on them and the option of renewal under the lease was void and unenforceable on account of uncertainty. The appellants further prayed for delivery of possession and for a decree for a sum of Rs. 2.655/- as past mesne profits and future mesne profits at Rs. 250/- per mesne as from December 1, 1945. The respondent filed his written statement on March 11, 1946, and an additional written statement on November 26, 1946 whereby he raised an objection to the jurisdiction of the Court by reason of the Mysore House Rent Control Order of 1945. The trial Judge upheld the preliminary objection and dismissed the suit. On appeal, the High Court set aside the decree on the ground that the nature and scope of the suit had been misconceived by the trial Court and that it was not based on relationship of landlord and tenant and therefore S. 8(1) of the Mysore House Rent Control Order was inapplicable and the case was remanded for retrial.
(3.)On August 23, 1948, the suit was decreed,. The trial Court held that the lease was binding for the first period of ten years as from May 1, 1941, as it was supported by legal necessity; but the option of renewal was void and unenforceable for uncertainty and therefore a decree for possession was passed to be operative on the expiry of ten years, i.e., May 1, 1951. On appeal the High Court confirmed that decree on august 22, 1950
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.