{"id":125900,"date":"1994-04-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1994-04-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994"},"modified":"2017-02-05T22:23:48","modified_gmt":"2017-02-05T16:53:48","slug":"panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994","title":{"rendered":"Panty &amp; Company Pvt. Ltd vs Dundoo Balkrishnam Bombay on 5 April, 1994"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Panty &amp; Company Pvt. Ltd vs Dundoo Balkrishnam Bombay on 5 April, 1994<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1994 SCC  (4) 734<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S Mohan<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Mohan, S. (J)<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nPANTY &amp; COMPANY PVT. LTD.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nDUNDOO BALKRISHNAM BOMBAY\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT05\/04\/1994\n\nBENCH:\nMOHAN, S. (J)\nBENCH:\nMOHAN, S. (J)\nMUKHERJEE M.K. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1994 SCC  (4) 734\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t\t\t   ORDER\n<\/p>\n<p>1.The  appellant-tenant\t suffered a decree  for\t eviction<br \/>\nunder\tthe  Andhra  Pradesh  Buildings\t (Lease,  Rent\t and<br \/>\nEviction)  Control Act, 1960 (hereafter referred to as\t&#8216;the<br \/>\nAct&#8217;) on two grounds &#8211; (1) wilful default in payment of rent<br \/>\nand  (2)  bona fide need of a non-residential  building\t for<br \/>\nstarting a business.  That decree was affirmed in the  Court<br \/>\nof  Appeal.  The revision against the same was dismissed  in<br \/>\nlimine.\t  In  assailing\t the findings,\tMr  K.K.  Venugopal,<br \/>\nlearned\t Senior\t Counsel, would submit that as\tregards\t the<br \/>\nbona  fide need, the petition for eviction does\t not  plead,<br \/>\nmuch  less  prove  the\tnecessary  requirements\t of  Section<br \/>\n10(3)(e)(iii)  of the Act.  In other words, he has to  plead<br \/>\nthat  he was not occupying a nonresidential building in\t the<br \/>\ncity  or in possession of such a premises.  Such a  plea  is<br \/>\ntotally absent.\t As laid down by this Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/132651\/\">Hasmat Rai v.<br \/>\nRaghunath  Prasad1 the<\/a>re must be pleas and proof thereof  on<br \/>\nthese  aspects.\t  Therefore the petition on this  ground  of<br \/>\nbona  fide  need  was liable to be thrown out  for  lack  of<br \/>\nnecessary pleadings.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.As regards the arrears, there is no finding that  there<br \/>\nwas wilful default on the part of the appellant-tenant.\t  On<br \/>\nthe  contrary,\twhat has been found by the  trial  court  is<br \/>\nnegligence or indifference.  As a matter of fact the  tenant<br \/>\nhad been lulled into a belief that the rent collector of the<br \/>\nlandlord  would come and collect the rent.  Because of\tthis<br \/>\nbelief he did not pay the rent in due time.  At no point  of<br \/>\ntime, the tenant was informed that he was to pay<br \/>\n1  (1981) 3 SCC 103, 109: (1981) 3 SCR 605, 612<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">735<\/span><br \/>\nregularly.   On the contrary there had been acceptances\t  of<br \/>\nthe  rents  by the landlord at intermittent  intervals.\t  On<br \/>\nthis  aspect  the law has been laid down by  this  Court  in<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/1761668\/\">Rashik Lal v. Shah Gokuldas2.  That<\/a> ratio ought to have been<br \/>\napplied\t by the courts below.  Then against in\tS.  Sundaram<br \/>\nPillai\tv. V.R. Pattabiraman3 what is talked of is  reckless<br \/>\nnegligence.   There  is no such recklessness in\t this  case.<br \/>\nConsequently it is submitted that the impugned judgments are<br \/>\nliable to be set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.In  opposition to this Mr K. Parasaran, learned  Senior<br \/>\nCounsel would urge that as regards arrears the appellant was<br \/>\nissued a notice demanding arrears in the first instance\t for<br \/>\nthe period 1-2-1972 (sic) to 31-1-1972.\t In spite of such  a<br \/>\nnotice,\t no step whatever was taken.  Repeated reminders  as<br \/>\nseen  from the various exhibits clearly show how the  tenant<br \/>\nhad wilfully defaulted in payment of rents.  In fact in\t the<br \/>\nnotice\tdated  15-10-1972, it has been clearly\tstated\tthat<br \/>\nthere have been repeated and numerous wilful defaults in due<br \/>\npayment\t of rents.  The plea was met by stating\t that  there<br \/>\nwas  negotiation between landlord and tenant and the  tenant<br \/>\nwas expecting adjustment of the amount incurred towards\t the<br \/>\nrepairs,  as  against the rent.\t Therefore,  the  plea\tthat<br \/>\nthere  was  no wilful default is not  correct.\t The  courts<br \/>\nbelow have rightly concluded the issue against the tenant on<br \/>\nthis  aspect.\tThis  alone would be  sufficient  to  uphold<br \/>\neviction.   The case cited on behalf of the tenant  in\tthis<br \/>\nregard\twill  have no relevance because <a href=\"\/doc\/1761668\/\">Rashik Lal  v.\tShah<br \/>\nGokuldas2<\/a>  dealt  with\tthe case of  habitual  default.\t  S.<br \/>\nSundaram  Pillai v. V.R. Pattabiraman3 dealt with the  scope<br \/>\nof  the\t provisos  to Section 10(2)(i)\tof  the\t Tamil\tNadu<br \/>\nBuildings  ( Lease and Rent Control) Act, as to the  deeming<br \/>\nprovision and the wilful default in the context.  That\tcase<br \/>\nwill have no application to the facts here.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.Concerning  the second ground, no doubt, there  was  no<br \/>\nspecific  plea\tthat the landlord was not occupying  a\tnon-<br \/>\nresidential building of his own nor that he was entitled  to<br \/>\npossession of any such building.  Nevertheless, the  parties<br \/>\nhad  adduced evidence with full knowledge  relating  thereto<br \/>\nand  understood the scope of their case and took the  trial.<br \/>\nHence  it is too late for the tenant to resile and urge\t the<br \/>\nground of non-pleading.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.We have carefully considered the above submissions.  As<br \/>\nregards\t the arrears we find that the tenant was  all  along<br \/>\ncontending adjustment of rent towards repairs as found\tfrom<br \/>\nthe  trial  court&#8217;s judgment.  Therefore, the  plea  of\t the<br \/>\ntenant\twas  that  he had incurred such\t an  expenditure  on<br \/>\nrepairs\t which requires to be adjusted as against the  rent.<br \/>\nBesides,  we  also  find from the  records  that  there\t are<br \/>\nseveral\t reminders calling upon the tenant to pay  the\trent<br \/>\ndated 2-1-1972 even 5-6-1971 P-3, 10-7-1971 P-4, 8-9-1971 P-<br \/>\n5,  10-1-1972 P-6, 12-6-1972 P-7, 12-7-1972  P-8,  29-9-1972<br \/>\nand  15-10-1972.  In the last of the notices what is  stated<br \/>\nby the landlord &#8216;is as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      &#8220;In view of your repeated and numerous  wilful<br \/>\n\t      defaults\tin  due payment of rents and  as  my<br \/>\n\t      clients by my earlier notices have already<br \/>\n\t      2 (1989) 1 SCC 542<br \/>\n\t      3 (1985) 1 SCC 591<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">\t      736<\/span><br \/>\n\t      terminated  your tenancy with effect from\t the<br \/>\n\t      end of September 1972 my clients are not bound<br \/>\n\t      or  prepared  to receive or  encase  the\tsaid<br \/>\n\t      cheque  and  the\tsame  is  returned  to\t you<br \/>\n\t      herewith.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      Further my clients bona fide intend to start a<br \/>\n\t      hotel  business in the premises ]eased to\t you<br \/>\n\t      after    making\tsuitable    additions\t and<br \/>\n\t      alterations to the premises.  They are  there,<br \/>\n\t      in  bona\tfide need of the said  premises\t for<br \/>\n\t      their own occupation.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>6.Under these circumstances the conclusion is inescapable<br \/>\nthat  the tenant had committed wilful default in payment  of<br \/>\narrears\t of rent.  However, what is pressed into service  by<br \/>\nMr Venugopal is the decision of this Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/1761668\/\">Rashik Lal  v.<br \/>\nShah Gokuldas<\/a> case2.  No doubt there are observations in the<br \/>\nconcluding paragraph of said judgment that the landlord must<br \/>\ninform the tenant about payment of rent where the tenant had<br \/>\nbeen  lulled in the belief that intermittent payments  could<br \/>\nbe accepted.  We have got to point out, as rightly urged  by<br \/>\nMr Parasaran however, the language under this Act is totally<br \/>\ndifferent and therefore this ruling has no application.\t  We<br \/>\nfind the conduct of the tenant not paying the rent in  spite<br \/>\nof repeated reminders to which just now we have alluded will<br \/>\nconstitute  default.   The case of S. Sundaram\tPillai3\t has<br \/>\nalso  no  application  because as is  rightly  urged  by  Mr<br \/>\nParasaran,  that dealt with the scope of the  proviso  under<br \/>\nSection\t 10(2) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease  and\tRent<br \/>\nControl) Act.  Nevertheless where there is utter  negligence<br \/>\nor reckless negligence as seen from the non-payment of\trent<br \/>\nin  spite of repeated reminders, the conclusion that it\t was<br \/>\nwilful could easily be sustained.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.Turning  to the plea of bona fide need, no doubt  there<br \/>\nis   no\t  specific  plea  as  is  required   under   Section<br \/>\n10(3)(a)(iii), yet we are unable to hold that the finding in<br \/>\nthis  regard is in any way vitiated.  The parties have\tgone<br \/>\nto  Rent Controller and understood the scope of their  case.<br \/>\nThere  is a statement of the landlord wherein he has  stated<br \/>\nas follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      &#8220;We wanted the premises for constructing a big<br \/>\n\t      South  Indian style hotel as it is a  suitable<br \/>\n\t      place and in view of the encouragement we\t got<br \/>\n\t      from  the\t Tourism  department.\tWe  got\t the<br \/>\n\t      adjacent premises vacated for that purpose and<br \/>\n\t      till  today it is kept vacant.  The  place  is<br \/>\n\t      centrally\t located  and  well-suited  for\t the<br \/>\n\t      hotel.  We have already started a hotel in the<br \/>\n\t      name of Hotel Park Lane, on the western style.<br \/>\n\t      We  want\tto start a big\thotel  with  several<br \/>\n\t      storeys consisting of about 300 rooms in it.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Unfortunately  for  the\t tenant it  has\t not  been  elicited<br \/>\nwhether the adjacent premises is non-residential.  No  doubt<br \/>\nlaw requires as laid down in <a href=\"\/doc\/132651\/\">Hasmat Rai v. Raghunath Prasad&#8217;<\/a><br \/>\nthat there must be a specific plea and proof thereof.\tEven<br \/>\nin  the absence of such a plea where the evidence  has\tbeen<br \/>\nlet  in\t this  case and this was  not  seriously  challenged<br \/>\neither in the Court of Appeal or in the revisional court, we<br \/>\nare unable to differ from that finding.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.In  the result, the civil appeal will stand  dismissed.<br \/>\nThere shall be no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">737<\/span><\/p>\n<p>9.As  regards  time to vacate as agreed to  by\tboth  the<br \/>\nlearned\t counsel,  time is granted till 31-12-1994  to\thand<br \/>\nover  vacant  peaceful possession.  However, this  shall  be<br \/>\nsubject\t to the usual undertaking to be filed by the  tenant<br \/>\nwithin four weeks from today.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">738<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Panty &amp; Company Pvt. Ltd vs Dundoo Balkrishnam Bombay on 5 April, 1994 Equivalent citations: 1994 SCC (4) 734 Author: S Mohan Bench: Mohan, S. (J) PETITIONER: PANTY &amp; COMPANY PVT. LTD. Vs. RESPONDENT: DUNDOO BALKRISHNAM BOMBAY DATE OF JUDGMENT05\/04\/1994 BENCH: MOHAN, S. (J) BENCH: MOHAN, S. (J) MUKHERJEE M.K. (J) [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-125900","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Panty &amp; Company Pvt. Ltd vs Dundoo Balkrishnam Bombay on 5 April, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Panty &amp; Company Pvt. Ltd vs Dundoo Balkrishnam Bombay on 5 April, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1994-04-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-02-05T16:53:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Panty &amp; Company Pvt. Ltd vs Dundoo Balkrishnam Bombay on 5 April, 1994\",\"datePublished\":\"1994-04-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-05T16:53:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994\"},\"wordCount\":1420,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994\",\"name\":\"Panty &amp; Company Pvt. Ltd vs Dundoo Balkrishnam Bombay on 5 April, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1994-04-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-05T16:53:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Panty &amp; Company Pvt. Ltd vs Dundoo Balkrishnam Bombay on 5 April, 1994\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Panty &amp; Company Pvt. Ltd vs Dundoo Balkrishnam Bombay on 5 April, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Panty &amp; Company Pvt. Ltd vs Dundoo Balkrishnam Bombay on 5 April, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1994-04-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-02-05T16:53:48+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Panty &amp; Company Pvt. Ltd vs Dundoo Balkrishnam Bombay on 5 April, 1994","datePublished":"1994-04-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-05T16:53:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994"},"wordCount":1420,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994","name":"Panty &amp; Company Pvt. Ltd vs Dundoo Balkrishnam Bombay on 5 April, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1994-04-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-05T16:53:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/panty-company-pvt-ltd-vs-dundoo-balkrishnam-bombay-on-5-april-1994#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Panty &amp; Company Pvt. Ltd vs Dundoo Balkrishnam Bombay on 5 April, 1994"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125900","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=125900"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125900\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=125900"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=125900"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=125900"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}