PRABHU versus RAMDEV & ORS.

PRABHU versus RAMDEV & ORS.

Tenants inducted by the mortgagee became Khatedars under s. 15 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, upon commencement of the Act and cannot be ejected except in accordance with its provisions. Since grounds for ejectment were not proved, possession of respondents is protected.

Parties
Appellant: Prabhu; Respondent: Ramdev; Respondent: Yadram; Respondent: Nathu; Respondent: Respondent No. 4; Respondent: Respondent No. 5
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
28 February 1966
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court—appeal by Special Leave From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs, in favour of respondent No. 1.
Legal Topics
Usufructuary Mortgage, Tenant Rights, Ejectment, Statutory Protection for Tenants
Property Law Tenancy Law Usufructuary Mortgage Tenant Rights Ejectment Statutory Protection for Tenants

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Prabhu

Appellant

Ramdev

Respondent

Yadram

Respondent

Nathu

Respondent

Respondent No. 4

Respondent

Respondent No. 5

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court—appeal by Special Leave From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether tenants inducted by mortgagee during a usufructuary mortgage can be ejected after redemption of the mortgage under the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955

Ratio Decidendi

Tenants inducted by the mortgagee became Khatedars under s. 15 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, upon commencement of the Act and cannot be ejected except in accordance with its provisions. Since grounds for ejectment were not proved, possession of respondents is protected.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs, in favour of respondent No. 1.

Orders

  • The view taken by the Board about respondents' status is affirmed; High Court's dismissal of appellant's writ petition is upheld; appeal dismissed with costs in favour of respondent No. 1.