LAXMI & CO versus DR. ANANT R. DESHPANDE & ANR.
Section 42A requires the occupant to appear on the date of hearing and claim tenancy under the 1947 Act for the issue to be framed; in absence of appearance and such claim, the trial court is not obliged to frame a preliminary issue, and can proceed ex parte.
- Parties
- Appellant: Laxmi & Co.; Respondent: Dr. Anant R. Deshpande
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 12 September 1972
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; judgment of High Court set aside.
- Legal Topics
- Interpretation of 'appearance' Under S.42 a of Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, Framing of Preliminary Issues in Tenancy Disputes, Tenant Protection Under Bombay Rent, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act 1947
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Laxmi & Co.
Appellant
Dr. Anant R. Deshpande
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether 'appears' in s. 42A means appearance of the party in person or through counsel at the date of hearing
- 2 Whether framing and determination of a preliminary issue under s. 42A is obligatory regardless of the party's presence on the hearing date
Ratio Decidendi
Section 42A requires the occupant to appear on the date of hearing and claim tenancy under the 1947 Act for the issue to be framed; in absence of appearance and such claim, the trial court is not obliged to frame a preliminary issue, and can proceed ex parte.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; judgment of High Court set aside.
Orders
- High Court to deal with the application for setting aside the ex-parte decree.
- Parties to pay and bear own costs in this appeal.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment