BHAGWATI PRASAD versus SHRI CHANDRAMAUL

BHAGWATI PRASAD versus SHRI CHANDRAMAUL

Given the pleadings and evidence, even though tenancy was not proved, the defendant was in possession as a licensee and the decree for ejectment is valid on that basis; denial of past rent stands, but future mesne profits are payable by licensee in possession after decree.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Bhagwati Prasad; Respondent/plaintiff: Suri Chandramaul
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 October 1965
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeals (nos. 964 and 965 of 1964) From Allahabad High Court First Appeal No. 564 of 1958 / Supreme Court of India Judgment on Cross Appeals
Outcome
Plaintiff's appeal partly allowed; defendant's appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Practice & Procedure, Pleadings, Licensee and Mesne Profits, Ejectment
Civil Law Property Law Practice & Procedure Pleadings Licensee and Mesne Profits Ejectment

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bhagwati Prasad

Appellant/defendant

Suri Chandramaul

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeals (nos. 964 and 965 of 1964) From Allahabad High Court First Appeal No. 564 of 1958 / Supreme Court of India Judgment on Cross Appeals

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a decree for ejectment can be passed on the ground of licence when tenancy is not proved but possession is established as a licensee.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to past rent and future mesne profits in the facts of the case.

Ratio Decidendi

Given the pleadings and evidence, even though tenancy was not proved, the defendant was in possession as a licensee and the decree for ejectment is valid on that basis; denial of past rent stands, but future mesne profits are payable by licensee in possession after decree.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's appeal partly allowed; defendant's appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Decree for ejectment against defendant confirmed on ground of licence.
  • Defendant directed to pay future mesne profits at Rs. 300 per month from 16 October 1958 (date of trial court decree) until delivery of possession to plaintiff.