SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(SC) 840

S.N.PHUKAN, V.N.KHARE
P. K. Vasudeva – Appellant
Versus
Zenobia Bhanot – Respondent


Judgment

V.N. Khare, J.-Since common question of fact and law are involved in these civil appeals and as such they were being disposed of by a common judgment.

2. In all these appeals the appellant are the tenants and the respond­ent is the landlady. The respondent herein owns a premises in the city of Chandigarh. There were four separate tenements in the said build­ing, two of which are occupied by the two appellants herein. In the 1975, the husband of respondent landlady who was a government servant retired from service and on 5.1.85 he died. The State Legislature of Punjab amended the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). By the aforesaid amendment a new Section 13A was added in the Act. The aforesaid Section 13A reads as under :

“13A. Right to recover immediate possession of residential or scheduled building to accrue to certain persons where a specified landlord at any time, within one year prior to or within one year after the date of his retirement or after his retirement but within one year of the date of commencement of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction (Amendment) Act, 1985, whichever is later, applies to the Controller al











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top