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

2002 Supreme(SC) 175

BRIJESH KUMAR, R.C.LAHOTI
Gurdial Singh – Appellant
Versus
Raj Kumar Aneja – Respondent


JUDGMENT

R.C. Lahoti, J.-There is a property described as Gurdial Complex situated at SCO 1108-1109, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh. Admittedly, the property is owned by Sqn. Ldr. Gurdial Singh (Retd.), Mrs. Jasmer Kaur, Mrs. Jagjit Kaur, Miss Sonia Bal and Vikram Singh Bal. Gurdial Singh holds general power of attorney on behalf of other four co-owners. Collectively they will be referred to as Owner for the sake of brevity.

2. Kashmiri Lal Goyal, Advocate, defendant No. 1 before the Rent Controller (respondent No. 3 herein) claims to be a tenant, also alleged to be so by owners and will be referred to as Goyal . Out of the persons inducted in possession of the premises by Goyal, only two, namely Raj Kumar Aneja and Rakesh Sharma, Advocate were revision petitioners before the High Court and are respondents No. 1 and 2 before us. There is a dispute as to the character of occupation and the status of these two - whether they are sub-tenants or tenants under the owners. They will be collectively referred to as occupants .

3. On 6th January, 1988, a registered Deed of Lease was executed between owners and Goyal whereby 750 sq.ft. area on the first floor of Gurdial Complex was taken on leas

























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