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

2000 Supreme(SC) 88

D.P.WADHWA, S.SAGHIR AHMAD
G. Kaushalya Devi – Appellant
Versus
Ghanshyamdas – Respondent


JUDGMENT

D.P. Wadhwa, J.-Leave granted.

2. Appellant is a tenant. His eviction from suit premises has been affirmed by the High Court in revision filed by him. Feeling aggrieved, he has filed this appeal.

3. Respondent-landlord filed eviction petition against the appellant under the provisions of Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short, the Act ) on three grounds, namely, (1) willful default in payment of rent; (2) bona fide requirement for personal occupation; and (3) the tenant does not require the premises as he had secured alternative accommodation. Premises are non-residential. During the course of proceedings before the Rent Controller, the ground of securing alternative accommodation was not pressed. Rent Controller held that there was default in payment of rent and also that the premises were required bona fide by the landlord for conducting his business. He ordered eviction of the appellant. The Appellate Authority under the Act affirmed the findings of the Rent Controller upholding the eviction of the appellant. Against that order, the appellant filed revision in the High Court under Section 22 of the Act. High Court by the impugned





















































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