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

2002 Supreme(SC) 402

R.C.LAHOTI, RUMA PAL
G. K. Bhatnagar (D) By Lrs. – Appellant
Versus
Abdul Alim – Respondent


ORDER

Late G.K. Bhatnagar, who has expired during the pendency of these proceedings and whose legal representatives have been brought on record in his place as the appellants, owned a suit shop let out to the tenant-respondent on 1/5/1966 on payment of Rs. 50/- by way of rent and Rs. 6/- by way of electricity charges. For the purpose of convenience we would refer to Late G.K. Bhatnagar as landlord and the respondent as tenant . On 28/5/1979 proceedings for eviction were initiated by the landlord by filing a petition before the rent controller on the ground under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter the Act , for short) alleging that the tenant had, without the permission of the landlord, sub-let the premises and parted with possession of the whole of the premises in favour of one Jagdish Chander. According to the tenant-respondent, there was no sub-letting: Jagdish Chander was taken into partnership by him in his pre-existing business run in the suit shop under deed of partnership dated 13/10/1978.

2. The Rent Controller found that there has been no sub-letting of the premises and, therefore, directed the petition to be d
















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