w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Sitabai Shantaram Talawnekar & Others v/s Custodian of Evacuee Property & Others


Company & Directors' Information:- PROPERTY CO PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U70101WB1943PTC011361

Company & Directors' Information:- L B PROPERTY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U70109MH2005PTC153870

    Civil Appeal Nos. 8802-8803 of 2013 with Contempt Petition (C) Nos.187-188 of 2012 [Arising out of S.L.P.(C) Nos.35980-35981 of 2009]

    Decided On, 25 February 2020

    At, Supreme Court of India

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY

    For the Appellants: T. Mahipal, Advocate. For the Respondents: K.J. John & Co.



Judgment Text


R. Subhash Reddy, J.

Civil Appeal Nos.8802-8803 of 2013

These civil appeals are filed, aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 08.05.2009 passed in W.P. No.142 of 2009 and the judgment and order dated 09.09.2009 passed in L.P.A. No.14 of 2009 by the High Court of Bombay at Goa.

2. The subject matter of dispute relates to property known as `Conde-Mayem'. The said property, covered by Survey Nos.113, 116, 114 and 115/1, 2 and 3, is situated at Mayem, Bicholim in the State of Goa. The said property originally belonged to one Eurico de Soza Joquem Noroana. After the liberation of Goa the said property was declared as evacuee property and same was under the supervision of the Custodian of Evacuee Property, under provisions of the Goa, Daman and Diu Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1964 (for short, `Evacuee Property Act'). The appellants claim to be in possession of the aforesaid properties as tenants of the Custodian. When there was a dispute between the predecessors of the appellants and the 2nd respondent (now represented by his legal heirs), the predecessors of the appellants filed Civil Suit No.126 of 1984 on the file of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bicholim praying for permanent injunction restraining the respondent-defendant from interfering with the suit property. On 15.07.1985 the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bicholim granted ex-parte injunction in the civil suit and it is stated that the appeal filed before the District Judge by the 2nd respondent ended in dismissal. On 05.11.1984 respondent no.2 filed an application before the Court of Custodian of Evacuee Property, Panji, claiming that he was in possession of the portion of cashew garden and the appellants were trying to evict him as he was not paying the exorbitant rent demanded by the appellants. Vide order dated 21.01.1986 the Custodian of Evacuee Property dismissed the application of respondent no.2. Alleging that inspite of injunction orders obtained by the appellants in Civil Suit No.126 of 1984, respondents were interfering with the property in question, the appellants got police protection from the trial court vide order dated 29.08.1989. Thereafter the 2nd respondent filed Regular Civil Suit No.60 of 1990 in respect of portion of property covered by Survey Nos.114 and 116 and the said suit ended in dismissal vide order dated 18.12.1992.

3. As per Section 56 of Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as, `the Tenancy Act'), the Act was not applicable in respect of evacuee properties. By virtue of Goa Administration of Evacuee Property (Amendment) Act, 1989, the provisions of Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964 were made applicable to the evacuee properties. In view of such amendment, respondent no.2 filed an application under Sections 7 and 8A of the Tenancy Act seeking declaration that he is a tenant of the portion of the suit properties covered in Civil Suit No.126 of 1984. The primary authority, i.e., Joint Mamlatdar-I, Bicholim, Goa vide order dated 30.08.2002 allowed the application declaring the 2nd respondent as a tenant. The said order is confirmed by the appellate authority vide order dated 08.01.2003 and further confirmed by Administrative Tribunal vide order dated 30.12.2008. When the appellants have filed writ petition in W.P.No.142 of 2009 questioning the aforesaid orders, learned Single Judge of the High Court of Bombay at Goa dismissed the writ petition vide order dated 08.05.2009. When the said order is appealed before the Division Bench, by way of Letters Patent Appeal, same is dismissed as not maintainable. Though the Division Bench of the High Court did not go into merits of the matter, but in view of the long standing dispute between the parties, we have heard the matter on merits with the consent of the learned advocates appearing on both sides.

4. Learned senior counsel Sri Siddharth Bhatnagar appearing for the appellants has contended that the application of the 2nd respondent claiming tenancy was allowed without recording any valid reasons in support of the claim. It is submitted that the alleged oral compromise is made basis by the primary authority for allowing the application without examining the relevant aspects as per the provisions of Tenancy Act for declaration of tenant. It is submitted that there is no evidence on record to show that 2nd respondent was a `tenant' or `deemed tenant' within the meaning of the Tenancy Act and rules made thereunder to allow his application for declaration of tenancy rights. It is further submitted that undisputedly land in question is an evacuee property governed by the provisions of the Evacuee Property Act and that though originally the Tenancy Act was not applicable to evacuee properties but only by virtue of Amending Act 19 of 1989, the said Act is made applicable to evacuee properties for tenancies created by Custodian. It is further submitted that in absence of any acceptable evidence on record to show that 2nd respondent was tenant of the land in question his claim was erroneously allowed by the primary authority and no other authority, namely, appellate and revisional authorities and the learned Single Judge of the High Court have considered the matter in proper perspective and have confirmed the order mechanically.

5. On the other hand, Sri P. Venugopal, learned counsel appearing for the legal heirs of the 2nd respondent, has submitted that there is a concurrent finding by all the authorities which is confirmed by learned Single Judge of the High Court, as such, there are no grounds to interfere with the same. It is submitted that the parties are related and the 2nd respondent was in possession of a portion of the land which is covered by the application claiming tenancy rights and the oral evidence led before the primary authority confirms the possession of the 2nd respondent. It is further submitted that in view of the available oral and documentary evidence on record, the primary authority has declared tenancy in favour of 2nd respondent and there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned orders passed by the High Court confirming the orders of the statutory authorities.

6. Having heard learned counsels on both sides, we have perused the impugned order and other material placed on record.

7. The Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964 is an Act to provide for the regulation of the terms of tenancy with respect to agricultural lands in the Union Territory of Goa, Daman and Diu. Section 2 sub-section (23) of the Tenancy Act defines the term, `tenant'. As per the aforesaid Section `tenant' means a person who on or after the date of commencement of the Act holds land on lease and cultivates it personally and includes a person who is or was deemed to be a tenant under the Act. Section 4 of the Tenancy Act deals with the `persons deemed to be tenants'. As per Section 4 deemed tenant is a person lawfully cultivating any land belonging to another person on or after the 1st of July, 1962 but before the commencement of the Act, i.e., 08.02.1965. Section 56 of the Act originally exempted certain categories of lands, including the lands covered by the Goa, Daman and Diu Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1964.

8. The Goa, Daman and Diu Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1964 and the Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964 are amended by the Amending Act 19 of 1989, extending the benefits of Tenancy Act to the evacuee properties. As per Section 2(kkk) of the Amending Act, `tenancy' means the relationship existing between the tenant and the Custodian; and as per Section 2(kkkk) `tenant' means a person who on or after the date of commencement of the Goa Administration of Evacuee Property (Amendment) Act, 1989, holds land and cultivates it personally but does not include a person who holds land on lease for the purpose of plucking the fruits only. Section 3 of the Amending Act amends Section 3 of the principal Act, to override other laws. As amended, Section 3 of principal Act reads as under :

"3. Act to override other laws.-

(1) On and from the date of coming into force of the Goa Administration of Evacuee Property (Amendment) Act, 1989, the provisions of the Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964 (Act 7 of 1964), for the time being in force, shall apply in respect of agricultural land and tenancies created by the Custodian.

(2) The provisions of this section shall, save as otherwise expressly provided, have effect notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any instrument having effect by virtue of any such law."

A reading of definition of `tenancy' and `tenant' coupled with the amended Section 3 of the principal Act makes it clear that the provisions of Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964 are made applicable only to agricultural land and tenancies created by the Custodian. There is yet another important aspect which has bearing on the issue is the provision under Section 32 of the Evacuee Property Act which reads as under :

"32. Transactions relating to evacuee property void in certain circumstances.-(1) As from the commencement of this Act, no transfer of or transaction in respect of any property belonging to a Portuguese national shall be valid unless it is made with the previous approval of the Custodian.

(2) Subject to the other provisions contained in this Act, every transaction entered into by any person in respect of property declared or deemed to be declared to be evacuee property within the meaning of this Act shall be void unless entered into by or with the previous approval of the Custodian"

Section 32, as referred to above, makes it clear that any transfer or transaction in respect of any evacuee property is not valid unless it is made with the previous approval of the Custodian.

9. From a perusal of the impugned orders passed by the primary authority, appellate authority and the revisional authority and the order of the learned Single Judge of the High Court, we are of the view that the claim of the 2nd respondent is allowed without recording any valid reasons based on acceptable evidence to prove the tenancy as claimed by him. The 2nd respondent has not claimed tenancy directly from the Custodian, in absence of which he cannot have the benefit of Amending Act 19 of 1989. Amending Act 19 of 1989 which amends the Goa, Daman and Diu Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1964 and the Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964 makes it clear that `tenancy' means the relationship existing between tenant and the Custodian. The 2nd respondent has not claimed tenancy on the basis of relationship existing with the Custodian. Further, by virtue of Section 3, as amended, the provisions of Tenancy Act are made applicable only to agricultural land and tenancies created by the Custodian. The said provision is a provision overriding other laws. Even as per the claim of the 2nd respondent he was not in possession at the time of making the application but it was his case that he was dispossessed after the appellants' predecessors obtained injunction orders in Civil Suit No.126 of 1984. As such, he has claimed to be a deemed tenant within the meaning of Section 4 of the Tenancy Act. To establish deemed tenancy under Section 4 of the Tenancy Act, one has to prove that person claiming deemed tenancy was in possession on or after the 1st of July 1962 and before the commencement of the Act, i.e., 08.02.1965. The 2nd respondent has not filed any acceptable documentary evidence to prove that he was in possession during the relevant time to claim tenancy. Even to claim sub-tenancy or transfer from the predecessor of the appellants, who was admittedly tenant from the Custodian under the provisions of the Evacuee Property Act, there was no prior approval from the Custodian as contemplated under Section 32 of the Evacuee Property Act. The primary authority, though referred to various objections raised by the appellants herein, has allowed the application based o

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

n the alleged oral settlement by the appellants' predecessor and the 2nd respondent. Such oral settlement which is disputed by the appellants cannot be the basis for grant of tenancy rights on the application made by the 2nd respondent. Even the appellate and revisional authorities have not considered the relevant aspects and disposed of the appeal and revision. Learned Single Judge of the High Court, by giving credence to the inspection report and excise licences obtained by 2nd respondent, has confirmed the order passed by the authorities. 10. For the aforesaid reasons, we allow these appeals and set aside the impugned orders, consequently the application filed by the 2nd respondent before the Joint Mamlatdar-I of Bicholim in Case No.JM/-1/TNC/19/95 stands dismissed. Contempt Petition(C)Nos.187-188 of 2012 11. In the Special Leave Petitions, while issuing notice on 14.12.2009, this Court has ordered to maintain status quo with regard to possession of the lands in question. Alleging that legal representatives of the 2nd respondent have violated the said order, appellants have moved the contempt petitions. In view of the final orders passed by this Court in these civil appeals it is not necessary to pass any orders in these contempt petitions at this stage. Accordingly, these contempt cases are closed.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

17-08-2020 M/s. Barnala Builders & Property Consultants Through Its Accounts Head, Zirakpur Versus Capt. U.C. Arora National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
21-05-2020 Intellectual Property Attorneys Association (Ipaa) & Another Versus The Controller General of Patents, Designs & Trade Marks & Another High Court of Delhi
19-05-2020 The Federal Agency for State Property Management of the Russian Federation (ROSIMUSHCESTVO) Versus Saraf Agency Pvt. Ltd. & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
06-04-2020 Khutala Property Consortium (PTY) Ltd Versus Mtubatuba Municipality Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa
14-02-2020 VGN Projects Estates Pvt. Ltd., (formerly known as VGN Property Developers Pvt. Ltd.), Represented by its Authorised Signatory A. Rangappan Versus The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-01-2020 Jumbo World Holdings Limited, British Virgin Islands & Another Versus Embassy Property Developments Private Limited, Bangalore, Rep. by its Director, K.Y. Gobikrishnan & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-09-2019 Barnala Builders & Property Consultants Versus Anirudh Sood National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
13-09-2019 Initiating Officer, Acit Benami Prohibition Versus Appellate Tribunal Under the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 & Others High Court of Delhi
07-08-2019 Embassy Property Developments Private Limited (formerly Dynasty Developers Private Limited), Bengalore & Others Versus SNP Ventures LLP, Rrepresented by its General Manager C.P. Subash & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-08-2019 K. Dalpat Singh Versus Intellectual Property Appellate Board, Rep.by Deputy Registrar, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
20-06-2019 S.I. Property Kerala Pvt. Ltd. Represented by Its Managing Director, Thiruvananthapuram Versus The Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Thiruvananthapuram High Court of Kerala
29-05-2019 Sushmita Saha Versus M/s. Amarpali Property Construction & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
03-04-2019 Milroc Good Earth Property & Developers Ltd. Versus C.C.E &S.T, Goa Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Mumbai
01-04-2019 S.S. Con-Build Pvt. Ltd. Versus Total Property Maintenance LLP & Others High Court of Delhi
03-01-2019 Prikrithi Foundations Limited, Represented by its Authorised Power of Attorney Agent Heritage Property Development Company Ltd., Represented by its Chairman & Managing Director V. Krishnaprasadh Versus The Secretary to the Government, Municipal Administration & Rural Development Department, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
16-11-2018 Mahendra Pratap Dubey Versus Managing Officer, Evacuee Property & Others Supreme Court of India
06-09-2018 D.D.R. Property Developers & Builders Private Limited Versus Deepti Integrated Logistic Private Limited High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-08-2018 Gajanan Property Dealer & Construction Pvt. Ltd. & Others Versus State of Orissa & Another High Court of Orissa
23-08-2018 Acit, Central Circle -2 Versus Sree Daksha Property Developers Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai
13-08-2018 Usha Mohan & Another Versus Property of Late M.C. Mohan & Another High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
09-08-2018 M/s. Popat & Kotecha Property & Others Versus Ashim Kumar Dey Supreme Court of India
06-08-2018 M/s. Green Vistas Property Development (Private) Ltd., Represented herein by its authorized signatory Vijay Gulechha & Another Versus M/s. Leatherex Tanning Company, Represented by its Managing Partner M.K.M. Kader Meera Sahib & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-07-2018 M/s. Colliers International (India) Property Services Limited Versus Thanpal Subhaiysh & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
13-07-2018 Spark New Zealand Trading Limited Versus Clearspan Property Assets Limited Court of Appeal of New Zealand
10-07-2018 Siddhi Property Developers Pvt. Ltd V/S Commissioner of Service Tax-II, Mumbai Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Mumbai
10-07-2018 Siddhi Property Developers Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Service Tax-II Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Mumbai
26-06-2018 M/s. Dhammanagi Property Developers Versus Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Zone High Court of Karnataka
07-06-2018 Rajendra Baban Deshmukh Prop of M/s. Shree Sai Property Consultant Versus Recovery Officer, Abhyudaya Co-op. Bank Ltd., Legal & Recovery Department & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
26-04-2018 Bhinmal Contractors Property & Land Developers Pvt.Ltd. Versus ACIT/DCIT - 4(1) Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Mumbai
05-02-2018 The Federal Agency For State Property Management of the Russian Federation (Rosemushestvo) Versus Saraf Agencies Pvt. Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
23-01-2018 Pratap J. Kesharia & Others Versus Megha Property Developers Ltd. & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
03-11-2017 In the Matter of: M/s. Ultratech Cement Limited Versus M/s. Golden Prosperous Property Private Limited National Company Law Tribunal Chennai
12-10-2017 Smartcity (Kochi) Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Versus Synergy Property Development Services Private Limited & Another National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
05-09-2017 M/s. Raptakos, Brett & Co. Ltd. Versus M/s. Ganesh Property Supreme Court of India
18-08-2017 K. Manivannan Versus The Chairman, Intellectual Property Appellate Board, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
16-08-2017 Kanta Kapoor & Others Versus Custodian Evacuee Property & Others High Court of Jammu and Kashmir
24-03-2017 Saraf Agencies Pvt. Ltd. & Another Versus Federal Agencies For State Property Management & Another High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
12-01-2017 M/s. Express Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by R.R. Arron Kumar the Chief Financial Officer Versus M/s. Property Bazzaar, Rep. by its Managing Partner, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
16-12-2016 Property Company Ltd Versus Rohinten Daddy Mazda High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
08-09-2016 Provincial Housings and Property Ltd. Versus Union of India & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
04-07-2016 Axis Law Corp Versus Intellectual Property Office Of Singapore Supreme Court of Singapore
17-06-2016 Qian Jin Versus Knox Property Investment Limited Court of Appeal of New Zealand
12-05-2016 Nova Property Group Holdings Ltd. & Others Versus Julius Peter Cobbett & Others Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa
04-05-2016 Creative Tours & Travels (India) Private Limited Versus Intellectual Property Appellate Board (Circuit Bench Sitting at Mumbai) & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
02-05-2016 Developers Township Property Owners Welfare Society Versus Jaiprakash Associates Limited National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
24-03-2016 Fifer Residential Limited & Others Versus Digby John Noyce As Liquidator Of Parnell Property Investments Limited & Others Court of Appeal of New Zealand
01-03-2016 Arun Kapoor Versus Vardhman Property Ltd. Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission New Delhi
20-01-2016 Jagatjit Industries Limited Versus The Intellectual Property Appellate Board & Others Supreme Court of India
21-12-2015 Development Credit Bank Ltd. Versus Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
02-11-2015 Mahavir Home Appliances Versus Intellectual Property Appellate Board & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
29-10-2015 UPL Limited Versus Bayer Intellectual Property GMBH & Another Intellectual Property Appellate Board
04-09-2015 M/s. Super Cassettes Industries Versus M/s. Singla Property Dealer Limited High Court of Punjab and Haryana
31-07-2015 M/s. Jay Construction Co. Versus The Custodian of the Enemy Property & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
02-07-2015 J. John Arockia Raj & Another Versus The Managing Director/Executive Director, M/s. Sri Renga Property Developers (P) Ltd. & Another Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Chennai
02-07-2015 Jones Investment Co. Inc. Versus Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
30-06-2015 Fedgroup Participation Bond Managers (PTY) Ltd. Versus Trustee of the Capital Property Trust Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa
26-06-2015 M/s. Magrath Property Developer Versus A.S. Veeranna National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
05-06-2015 Life Insurance Corporation of India rep. by The Branch Manager (P&Gs), Divisional Office Kottayam, Through The Hands of Its Manager, (Legal & Housing Property Finance), R. Surendran Versus K.P. Varughese High Court of Kerala
04-05-2015 Mahendra Singh & Geoffrey Hugh Bourchier As Trustees Of Shean Singh Family Trust Versus Potters Park Property Limited Court of Appeal of New Zealand
21-04-2015 M/s. Today Homes & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Others Versus M/s. Mapletree Property Pvt. Ltd. & Another High Court of Delhi
21-04-2015 Mahima Management Services Private Limited Versus Creative Property Developers Private Limited & Another High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
16-04-2015 C.B.S. Property Development Pvt. Ltd. Versus P.V.S. Raghupathy & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
25-03-2015 Monyetla Property Holdings (PTY) Limited Versus Imm Graduate School Of Marketing (PTY) Limited & Another Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa
16-03-2015 Clifton Dunes Investment 100 Limited & Another Versus City Capital Sa Property Holdings Limited Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa
10-03-2015 Shamnad Basheer, Ministry of HRD Chair Professor in Intellectual Property Rights West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences Versus Union of India, represented by its Secretary, Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion, Ministry of Industry & Commerce, Government of India & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-03-2015 Commissioner of Income-tax Versus Voora Property Developers (P.) Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-02-2015 Habitar Pragnya Property Developments Private Limited Versus Shivaram Kumar Malakala & Another High Court of Karnataka
20-02-2015 Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram represented by its Secretary Versus S.I Property (Kerala) Private Limited, Thiruvananthapuram represented by its Managing Director & Another High Court of Kerala
10-02-2015 Paul Sankar Versus Union of India, Custodian of Enemy Property for India, Mumbai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-02-2015 Taylor Jade Schmidt & Another Versus Ebada Property Investments Limited & Others Court of Appeal of New Zealand
06-01-2015 Kaveri Hotels Private Limited Versus Intellectual Property Appellate Board High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
12-12-2014 M/s. Quantum Real Estate and Property Development India Private Limited & Another Versus Bay Orient Realty Private Limited High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-12-2014 M/s. Popat & Kotecha Property & Others Versus The Supplier (India) & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
21-11-2014 Regent Insurance Company Ltd. Versus King?s Property Development (Pty) Ltd t/a King?s Prop Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa
09-10-2014 Mycitydeal Ltd. (trading as Groupon UK) & Others Versus Villas International Property Pte Ltd & Others Supreme Court of Singapore
09-10-2014 Intellectual Property Attorneys Association Versus Union of India & Another High Court of Delhi
31-07-2014 Perapanjakam Naidoo & Another Versus EP Property Projects (Pty) Ltd. & Others Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa
22-07-2014 Babulal Data & Others Versus Intellectual Property Appellate Board & Others High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
20-05-2014 Richard Ciliang Yan & Another Versus Mainzeal Property And Construction Limited & Others Court of Appeal of New Zealand
30-04-2014 Oriental Property Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Versus Uro Infotech Ltd. High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
21-04-2014 Mycitydeal Ltd (trading as Groupon UK) & Others Versus Villas International Property Pte Ltd & Others Supreme Court of Singapore
16-04-2014 The City of Cape Town Versus Arun Property Developments (PTY) Ltd. Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa
04-04-2014 Hindustan Unilever Limited, a Company incorporated under the Companies Act Versus The Controller of Patents & Designs Intellectual Property Building G.S.T. Road, Guindy & Others Intellectual Property Appellate Board
02-04-2014 TDI Fun Republic Shop Owner Welfare Association Versus M/s E-City Property Management & Services Pvt. Ltd. & Others Competition Commission of India
01-04-2014 Grancy Property Limited & Another Versus Seena Marena Investment (PTY) Ltd & Others Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa
24-02-2014 Property Owners' Association & Others Versus State of Maharashtra & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
12-02-2014 C. Jayaraj Versus M/s. Innovative Property Management & Co. & Others High Court of Karnataka
05-02-2014 M/s. Heritage Property Development Co. Pvt. Ltd.Versus Commissioner of Service Tax, Chennai Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal South Zonal Bench At Chennai
15-01-2014 M/s. Popat & Kotecha Property & Others Versus Ashim Kumar Dey High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
17-12-2013 Hf Residual Obligations Limited (Formerly Hanover Finance Limited) Versus Official Assignee In The Bankruptcy Of The Property Of Andrew Mark Krukziener Court of Appeal of New Zealand
07-11-2013 Gibbston Downs Wines Limited & Another Versus Property Ventures Limited (In Receivership And Liquidation) Court of Appeal of New Zealand
20-09-2013 Dr. Aloys Wobben Argestrasse 19, 26607 Aurich, Germany, Represented Through His Constituted Attorney Ms.Vasundhara Raman, Chennai Versus Intellectual Property Appellate Board, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-09-2013 M/s. Agya Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Versus M/s. Jones Lang Lasalle Property Consultants (India) P. Ltd. & Others High Court of Delhi
13-08-2013 Mohammed Muflih & Another Versus The Competent Authority Smugglers & Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, Madras & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
26-07-2013 The Great Christchurch Buildings Trust Versus Church Property Trustees Court of Appeal of New Zealand
24-07-2013 M/s. Stadmed Private Ltd. & Another Versus The Intellectual Property Appellate Board & Another High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
02-07-2013 Ghashitu and Others V/S Assistant Custodian, Enemy Property and Others. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
20-06-2013 Embassy Property Developments Limited & Another Versus Jumbo World Holdings Limited & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-06-2013 Ranbaxy Laboraties Ltd. Versus The Controller of Patents & Designs Intellectual Property Office & Others Intellectual Property Appellate Board
10-06-2013 M/s Crescent Property Developers Versus Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay