Kumari Gayatri Tripathi Vs Trust Mandir Shri Ramchanderji (Regd.)
.... ion of the Controller obtained in the prescribed manner, re-let the whole or any part of the premises within three years from the date of obtaining such possession, and in granting such permission, the Controller may direct the landlord to put such evicted tenant in possession of the premises. ...
Delhi High Court
Harjit Singh Sahni Vs Sidhant Gupta
.... on 14-A, 14-B, 14-C, 14-D & 21 of DRC Act, the landlord of such premises shall not re-let the premises within a period of three years from the date of obtaining possession from the tenant without the permission of the rent controller. 15. It is further necessary to lay down ...
Delhi High Court
Jai Dev Agarwal Vs Vijay Kumar Angrish
.... person not bona fide. This right of the tenant to re-enter the premises is, however, restricted only in cases where the tenant is ordered to be evicted either under Section 14(1)(e) or under Sections 14-A to 14-D and 21. If the possession is recovered under any order other than those referred to ...
Delhi High Court
M. Asadulla Khan Deceased By His Lrs Vs B. Lakshmipathiraju Major
.... n on 21.10.1975, but the said order has not surfaced. According to the plaintiffs, the record of proceedings were not available as per the endorsement dated 21.10.1975, issued by the Tahasildar of Piriyapatna. But, significantly, defendants have produced an order dated 15.05.1975 passed by the L ...
Karnataka High Court (Bengaluru Bench)
Sunil Kumar Agarwal Vs Raghabendra Pathak And Ors
.... the said plaintiff No.6 was accepted as the landlord by the defendant No.1 and there is no dispute to that effect. The fact of tenancy agreement is an admitted one and the court below rightly held the same to be an admitted one and on the basis of the said admission, the court below came to the ...
Gauhati High Court
KULDEEP SINGH Vs SANJAY AGGARWAL
.... right to relief must be judged to exist as on the date a suitor institutes the legal proceeding equally clear is the principle that procedure is the handmaid and not the mistress of the judicial process. If a fact, arising after the lis has come to court and has a fundamental impact on the righ ...
DELHI HIGH COURT
Harjeet Singh and Others Vs The State of Jharkhand
.... e provisions of Section 4 and other sections of the Act, the officer empowered and authorized under the Act shall exercise all the powers including making a complaint before the jurisdictional magistrate. It is also not in dispute that the Magistrate shall in such cases take cognizance on the basis ...
jharkhand high court
Modi Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. Vs Krishna Wanti (Since Decd) and Another <BR> Modi Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. and Another
.... ew was first taken by the Division Bench of this court in AIR 1980 Del 1 titled as Hem Chand Baid vs. Prem Wati Parekh which had quoted with approval the ratio laid down in 2nd 1970 Delhi 1748 Batto Mat''s case where the Division Bench held as under:- Apart from the fact that the Legislature coul ...
Delhi High Court
Savitri Devi Gupta Vs Dharam Pal Tanwar
.... ontrol Tribunal only if it is provided in the Rent Control Act. No power of review has been conferred on the Additional Rent Controller or on the Additional Rent Control Tribunal under Delhi Rent Control Act and Rent Controller or Rent Control Tribunal cannot exercise this power. In Jagdish Parshad ...
Delhi High Court
Punjab and Sind Bank Vs Shri Gurmukh Singh (since deceased) and Others
.... of Rs. 14,000/- is multiplied for a period of 66 months i.e. from 1.6.1982 to 30.11.1987 the dues towards the rent would be Rs. 9,24,000/-. The payment, however, was made @ Rs. 12,500/- totaling to Rs. 8,25,000/-. The difference of Rs. 9,24,000/- and Rs. 8,25,000/- is Rs. 99,000/- and which would b ...
Delhi High Court
Get In Touch With Us
We are here to help. Want to learn more about our services? Please get in touch, we'd love to hear from you!
