AN APPEAL MEMO

IN THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE AT PUNE
Mr ABC age 40 years,                                                         Civil Appeal No. _/ 200
occupation - service, resident of S.                            )
No. 115 Kasba Peth, Pune 411 Oil.                           )

Versus
Mr. CDE	                                                           )
age 50 years, occupation - business,                          )
resident of S. No. 230 Kasba Peth,                            )
Pune 411 Oil.	                                                           )

            BEING AGGRIEVED BY AND DISSATISFIED WITH the judgment and order, dated passed by the Small Causes Judge, Pune, in Civil Suit No. 00/2002, the present appellant prefers this memo of appeal on the following amongst other grounds of objections thereto:

1. That the Learned Lower Court has not followed the proper procedure, and this has resulted into miscarriage of justice. 

2. That the orders passed by the Learned Lower Court are violative of the principles of justice, equity and good conscience.

3. That the orders passed by the Learned Lower Court are contrary to the provisions of law and the principles of natural justice.

4. That the Learned Lower Court has failed to consider the evidence on record in a judicious manner.

5. That the findings arrived by the Learned Lower Court are hot supported by the evidence on record.

6. That the necessary issues of law and fact have not been framed and answered by the Learned Lower Court.

7. That the Learned Lower Court ought to have decided the matter under appeal in favour of this appellant.

8. That the Learned Lower Court ought to have held that the respondent had no right or authority to terminate the tenancy of this appellant.

9. That the Learned Lower Court was at an error in holding that the suit premises are required by the respondent for his personal bonafide occupation.

10. That the Learned Lower Court was wrong in holding that this appellant has acquired any other suitable accommodation.

11. That the Learned Lower Court has having answered the first issue in the negative decided the rest of the issues against the appellant, which itself is improper and illegal.

12. That the Learned Lower Court has in a very summary manner and roundabout fashion tried to interpret the concept of acquisition of other suitable accommodation.

13. That the Learned Lower Court, while deciding the application for interim injunction, has, in fact, decided the suit itself, and this is contrary to the provisions of law.

14. That the Learned Lower Court has misinterpreted all the relevant provisions of law as laid down in the Maharashtra Rent Control Act 1999.

15. That the Learned Lower Court has not considered the very fact that the balance of convenience was only in favour of this appellant,

16. That the order is dated    while its certified copy was applied for on__the same was delivered on__and hence, the appeal filed today is well within limitation.

17. That the necessary court fee is paid herewith. 

18. That the appellant, therefore, prays that for the reasons stated above and as may be argued at the time of hearing,  the record and proceedings be called for, this appeal be allowed, the orders under appeal be set aside and quashed, and orders deemed just and proper be kindly passed, for which act of grace and favour, this appellant as bounden in duty shall ever pray.
Pune.	                                                                                                    Sd/- TNT
                                                                                                            APPELLANT 
Dated : ____.
Sd/-   xXx ADVOCATE 
FOR APPELLANT