{"id":222778,"date":"1998-05-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1998-05-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998"},"modified":"2017-04-19T18:59:52","modified_gmt":"2017-04-19T13:29:52","slug":"ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998","title":{"rendered":"M\/S Electrical Cable Development &#8230; vs M\/S Arun Commercial Premises &#8230; on 6 May, 1998"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S Electrical Cable Development &#8230; vs M\/S Arun Commercial Premises &#8230; on 6 May, 1998<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: R Babu<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: A.S. Anand, S. Rajednra Babu<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nM\/S ELECTRICAL CABLE DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nM\/S ARUN COMMERCIAL PREMISES COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t06\/05\/1998\n\nBENCH:\nA.S. ANAND, S. RAJEDNRA BABU\n\n\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>\t\t      J U D G M E N T<br \/>\nRajendra Babu, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>     This appeal  is preferred\tby  a  Company\tincorporated<br \/>\nunder the  Companies Act. The claim of the appellant is that<br \/>\nan association\twhich was  an  unregistered  body  known  as<br \/>\n&#8220;Indian Cables Maker&#8217;s Association&#8221; was inducted in the year<br \/>\n1969 as\t a tenant  in the  premises Room No. 503, 5th floor,<br \/>\nArun Chambers,\tTardeo, Bombay\tby respondent No. 2 under an<br \/>\nagreement  termed   as\t&#8216;leave\t and  licence&#8217;\t dated\t23rd<br \/>\nSeptember, 1969\t at a rental of Rs. 1500\/- p.m. out of which<br \/>\nRs. 1000\/-  was towards\t the premises  and rent of Rs. 500\/-<br \/>\np.m. was  payable towards  furniture and  fixtures; that the<br \/>\nname of\t the appellant was changed from Indian Cable Maker&#8217;s<br \/>\nAssociation   into    M\/s   Electrical\t Cable\t Development<br \/>\nAssociation also  another un-registered body in the month of<br \/>\nAugust 1972  and with  the said\t association also  a similar<br \/>\nleave and  licence&#8217; agreement was executed by the respondent<br \/>\nNo. 2  on a  rental of\tRs. 1750\/- p.m. out of which rent of<br \/>\nRs. 1,000\/-  was towards  the premises and Rs. 750\/- towards<br \/>\nfixtures  and\tfurniture;  that  in  the  year\t 1976\t the<br \/>\nunregistered body  decided to convert itself in to a company<br \/>\nin order  to carry  on its  affairs more  effectively and so<br \/>\nregistered as  such under  the\tCompanies  Act,\t 1956;\tthat<br \/>\nrespondent No.2 continued to receive rents from appellant in<br \/>\nrespect of  the said  premises. The  appellant had also been<br \/>\nusing parking space in the building in question and had been<br \/>\nmaking regular payments to respondent No.1 Society; that the<br \/>\nappellant filed\t a suit\t for declaration in the year 1981 in<br \/>\nthe Court of Small Causes at Bombay that they are tenants in<br \/>\nrespect of  the suit  premises; that  the second  respondent<br \/>\nfiled as  suit bearing\tNo.  210\/296  of  1981\tseeking\t for<br \/>\neviction of  the appellant; that when those proceedings were<br \/>\npending, Respondent  No. 2  egged upon\trespondent  No.1  to<br \/>\nraise a\t dispute in  terms of  Section 91 of the Maharashtra<br \/>\nCo-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as<br \/>\n&#8220;the Act&#8221;)  for the  purpose of\t evicting the  appellant  to<br \/>\nenable respondent  No.2 to  get the  said premises  and\t use<br \/>\npersonally through  an arbitrator;  that the Arbitrator made<br \/>\nan award  on 23.3.1990\tdirecting eviction  of the appellant<br \/>\nand that  the second  respondent be directed to use the suit<br \/>\npremises personally;  that the\tappellant  filed  an  appeal<br \/>\nagainst the  said award\t before the  Maharashtra  State\t Co-<br \/>\noperative Appellate  Court which was further dismissed by on<br \/>\norder made  on 8.1.1991; that a writ petition was thereafter<br \/>\npreferred under\t Article 227  of the Constitution before the<br \/>\nHigh Court  of Bombay; that by an order made on 2.4.1991 the<br \/>\nHigh Court  upheld the\torder made  by the Maharashtra State<br \/>\nCo-operative Appellate Court and dismissed the writ petition<br \/>\nhowever giving\ttime to the appellant to vacate the premises<br \/>\nby about a month. Hence this appeals by special leave.\n<\/p>\n<p>     On 20th  August, 1991, this Court made an order calling<br \/>\nfor  a\t report\t from\tappellate  court   after  giving  an<br \/>\nopportunity  to\t  the  appellant  to  examine  such  of\t its<br \/>\nwitnesses as  are considered necessary to prove the receipts<br \/>\nand the\t agreement and\tallow the  respondent also a similar<br \/>\nopportunity of\trebuttal by  leading evidence  both oral and<br \/>\ndocumentary. A\treport\thas  been  received  by\t this  Court<br \/>\npursuant to  the said  order. The  findings recorded  by the<br \/>\nappellate court and against the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Shri Mukul\t Rohtagi, learned  Senior advocate  for\t the<br \/>\nappellant  contended   that  (1)  the  dispute\tbetween\t the<br \/>\nappellant and the second respondent arising under the Bombay<br \/>\nRent Act  is pending  consideration in\ta court of competent<br \/>\njurisdiction  and,  therefore,\tthe  authorities  exercising<br \/>\npowers\tunder  Section\t91  of\tthe  Maharashtra  State\t Co-<br \/>\noperative   Societies\tAct   could   not   exercise   their<br \/>\njurisdiction in the matter; (2) that the finding recorded by<br \/>\nthe appellate  court and affirmed by the High Court that the<br \/>\nappellant-Company is a distinct legal entity which came into<br \/>\nexistence in  1976 and\tis in  occupation of  suit  premises<br \/>\nwithout any  agreement of  leave  or  licence  is  incorrect<br \/>\ninasmuch as the appellant company is only a successor to the<br \/>\ntwo un-registered  bodies referred  to earlier; and (3) that<br \/>\nthe finding  recorded by the appellate court pursuant to the<br \/>\ndirections issued  by this Court on 20th of August, 1991 are<br \/>\nnot correct.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Section 91\t of the\t Act provides  for raising a dispute<br \/>\ninter alia  touching upon  the\tbusiness  of  a\t cooperative<br \/>\nsociety. when  a question  was raised  as to where a society<br \/>\nbuilds houses  of the  members and  such members let out the<br \/>\npremises, whether  it would  be within the scope of business<br \/>\nof the\tsociety, this  Court in\t O.N. Bhatnagar vs. Ruki Bai<br \/>\n(1982 (2)  SCC 244),  answered the same. It was held that if<br \/>\nthe business  of the  Society is  to construct or buy houses<br \/>\nand let\t them out  to it  s members,  such letting out would<br \/>\nform part  of its business. A society formed with the object<br \/>\nof providing  accommodation to\tits  members  which  is\t its<br \/>\nnormal business activity and has to ensure that the premises<br \/>\nare in occupation of its members in accordance with the bye-<br \/>\nlaws framed  by it  rather than\t of a person in unauthorised<br \/>\noccupation as  it is  the concern  of the members who let it<br \/>\nout to\tanother under an agree to leave an licence and wants<br \/>\nto secure  possession of  the premises for his own use after<br \/>\nthe termination\t of the\t licence. Therefore,  a claim by the<br \/>\nSociety together  with such member for ejectment of a person<br \/>\nwho was\t permitted to  occupy,\tupon  the  revocation  of  a<br \/>\nlicence, is  a dispute\tfalling within\tSection 91(1) of the<br \/>\nAct. The  same view  has been  reiterated by  this Court  in<br \/>\nSamwanwal kejrwal  vs. Vishal  Cooperative  Housing  Society<br \/>\nLtd. and  Others [(1990) 2 SCC 288]. Therefore, it would not<br \/>\nbe open to the appellant now to contend that the proceedings<br \/>\nbefore the  authorities functioning  under Section 91 of the<br \/>\nAct would be barred notwithstanding the proceedings filed by<br \/>\nrespondent No.\t2 before  the small causes Court. As held by<br \/>\nthis Court  in the aforesaid decisions the proceedings under<br \/>\nthe Act\t could be  maintained and , therefore, we are of the<br \/>\nview that  the\tfirst  contention  raised  by  Shri  Rohtagi<br \/>\ndeserves to be rejected.\n<\/p>\n<p>Plethora of  material was  placed before the authorities and<br \/>\nwe were\t also taken  through the same to show that there was<br \/>\nin existence  an unregistered  body known  as M\/S Electrical<br \/>\nCable Development  Association and  also  M\/S  Indian  Cable<br \/>\nMaker&#8217;s Association,  its predecessor.\tHowever, there is no<br \/>\nmaterial on  the record\t to show  that the  appellant is the<br \/>\nsuccessor to  such association.\t We have also carefully gone<br \/>\nthrough the  Memorandum of  Association and  the Articles of<br \/>\nthe appellant-Company  to find\tout whether  in any form the<br \/>\nunregistered body  has converted  itself into  a  registered<br \/>\nbody as\t a Company.  On the  other hand,  what is  stated in<br \/>\nclause 3(a) in regard to membership is as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>     &#8220;3 (a)  Every person who shall be a<br \/>\n     member    of    the    unregistered<br \/>\n     association  known\t as  &#8220;Electrical<br \/>\n     Cable Development\tAssociation&#8221;  at<br \/>\n     the date  of registration\tof  this<br \/>\n     Association shall be entitled as of<br \/>\n     right to be admitted as a member of<br \/>\n     this Association  on his submitting<br \/>\n     a formal  application addressed  to<br \/>\n     the Secretary  of\tthe  Association<br \/>\n     agreeing to  be bound  by the Rules<br \/>\n     and Regulations  and Bye-laws  made<br \/>\n     under these  presents. Such  a  fee<br \/>\n     but shall\thave to\t pay deposit  as<br \/>\n     per Rule  5, within  the period  as<br \/>\n     may be  prescribed and  extended by<br \/>\n     the Executive Committee.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>     All that  is provided  under the  said Article  is that<br \/>\nmember of  Electrical Cable  Development Association  as  of<br \/>\nright be  admitted as  a member\t of  the  appellant  Company<br \/>\nsubject to  certain conditions.\t It does  not say  that\t all<br \/>\nthose members in the unregistered association became members<br \/>\nof the\tassociation much  less any  resolution\tis  produced<br \/>\nbefore us of the Electrical Cable Development Association to<br \/>\nshow  that   they  are\t converting   themselves   into\t  an<br \/>\nincorporated body.  The members of the unregistered body are<br \/>\nall incorporated bodies having a high commercial standing in<br \/>\nthe corporate  sector, and  therefore, cannot be expected to<br \/>\nbe so  have or\tignorant as  not to  take such\tsteps in the<br \/>\nevent it  was the  intention  of  such\tbody  to  become  an<br \/>\nincorporated body  in the manner suggested by the appellant.<br \/>\nIf really such action had been taken, it would not have been<br \/>\ndifficult  for\tthe  appellant\tto  produce  such  material.<br \/>\nTherefore, the\tfact that  the appellant is a distinct legal<br \/>\nentity as found by the authorities below and affirmed by the<br \/>\nHigh  Court,   cannot  be   seriously  disputed.  Since\t the<br \/>\nappellant  is\ta  distinct  legal  entity  other  than\t the<br \/>\nunregistered bodies and there is no material to show that it<br \/>\nis a successor thereto it is not understandable a sot how it<br \/>\nbecame a  tenant in  respect of\t the premises  in  question,<br \/>\nwithout an agent with the Society or respondent No. 2 who is<br \/>\na member  thereof. it  baffles us and thus the view taken by<br \/>\nthe High  Court appears\t to us to be correct. Therefore, the<br \/>\nsecond contention  raised by  the appellant  either  has  no<br \/>\nmerit and is rejected.\n<\/p>\n<p>     So far  as the  third contention urged on behalf of the<br \/>\nappellant is concerned in the view  we have taken, we may at<br \/>\nonce state  that it is not necessary to examine the evidence<br \/>\nadduced before\tthe appellate  court and the appreciation of<br \/>\nthe same  by it. Even without deciding the same if we assume<br \/>\nthe same  for the purpose of appreciation of the matter that<br \/>\nthe findings recorded by the appellate court are not correct<br \/>\nand deserve to be answered in favour of the appellant, still<br \/>\nthe appellant  has to  fail in\tview of\t the finding we have<br \/>\nrecorded on the second contention raised by the appellants.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Therefore, we hold that the High Court was justified in<br \/>\nnot interfering\t with the  order made by the appellate court<br \/>\nand the\t appeal deserves  to be\t dismissed.  The  appeal  is<br \/>\ndismissed accordingly.\tHowever considering  the nature\t and<br \/>\ncircumstances of  the case, we make no order as to costs. In<br \/>\nthe circumstances of the case, we make no order as to costs.<br \/>\nIn the\tcircumstances of  the case,  we grant  time  to\t the<br \/>\nappellant to vacate the premises till 31st of December, 1998<br \/>\nsubject to  the condition that it shall voluntarily, without<br \/>\nputting the  respondents to  the necessity  of any execution<br \/>\ndeliver vacant possession of the premises to respondent No.2<br \/>\nand shall  furnish the\tusual  undertaking  to\tthat  effect<br \/>\nwithin four weeks from today.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India M\/S Electrical Cable Development &#8230; vs M\/S Arun Commercial Premises &#8230; on 6 May, 1998 Author: R Babu Bench: A.S. Anand, S. Rajednra Babu PETITIONER: M\/S ELECTRICAL CABLE DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION Vs. RESPONDENT: M\/S ARUN COMMERCIAL PREMISES COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD DATE OF JUDGMENT: 06\/05\/1998 BENCH: A.S. ANAND, S. RAJEDNRA BABU ACT: [&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-222778","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>M\/S Electrical Cable Development ... vs M\/S Arun Commercial Premises ... on 6 May, 1998 - 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\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S Electrical Cable Development ... vs M\/S Arun Commercial Premises ... on 6 May, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998\" \/>\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=\"1998-05-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-04-19T13:29:52+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S Electrical Cable Development &#8230; vs M\\\/S Arun Commercial Premises &#8230; on 6 May, 1998\",\"datePublished\":\"1998-05-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-19T13:29:52+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998\"},\"wordCount\":1758,\"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\\\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S Electrical Cable Development ... vs M\\\/S Arun Commercial Premises ... on 6 May, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1998-05-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-19T13:29:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S Electrical Cable Development &#8230; vs M\\\/S Arun Commercial Premises &#8230; on 6 May, 1998\"}]},{\"@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":"M\/S Electrical Cable Development ... vs M\/S Arun Commercial Premises ... on 6 May, 1998 - 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\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S Electrical Cable Development ... vs M\/S Arun Commercial Premises ... on 6 May, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1998-05-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-04-19T13:29:52+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S Electrical Cable Development &#8230; vs M\/S Arun Commercial Premises &#8230; on 6 May, 1998","datePublished":"1998-05-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-19T13:29:52+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998"},"wordCount":1758,"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\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998","name":"M\/S Electrical Cable Development ... vs M\/S Arun Commercial Premises ... on 6 May, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1998-05-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-19T13:29:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-electrical-cable-development-vs-ms-arun-commercial-premises-on-6-may-1998#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S Electrical Cable Development &#8230; vs M\/S Arun Commercial Premises &#8230; on 6 May, 1998"}]},{"@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\/222778","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=222778"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/222778\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=222778"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=222778"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=222778"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}