2011 (6) TMI 856

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r the Petitioner : Ms. Shobha,Adv., Ms. Bijoylakshmi, Adv. And Mr. Amit Mittal, Adv. ORDER Delay condoned. The petitioners' claiming to be tenants in relation to the property in dispute averred that they were paying a rent of ₹ 300 per month vide Rent Deed dated 28th October, 1991, with respondent nos. 2 & 3. There was dispute whether the premises were under the management of these....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the dispute between the parties. The courts returned the finding that the Trial Court had ignored the fact that Nigam possessed the full right to get the disputed Chabutra vacated and had there been any tenancy, the same stood terminated as back as in the year 1987. The property was encroaching upon the road as is evident even from the photographs filed before us including Exh. P-1. Against the o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppeal could lie against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 1.11.2006. The Division Bench had relied upon the full Bench judgment of that Court in that regard. Thus, we do not wish to comment on that ground in any further detail. As far as the merits are concerned, we see again no reason to interfere in the discretion exercised by the learned Single Judge. It is, keeping in view the facts....