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

1956 Supreme(SC) 92

SYED JAFAR IMAM, B.JAGANNATHA DAS, B.P.SINHA
Karnani Properties LTD. – Appellant
Versus
Augustine – Respondent


Advocates:
C.K.DAFTARY, D.N.MUKHERJI, S.C.JANAH, S.N.MUKHERJEE, SUKUMAR GHOSH

Judgement

SINHA, J.: The substantial question for determination in these three analogous appeals by special leave is whether the provisions of S.9 of the West Bengal Premises Rent Control (Temporary Provisions ) Act, 1950, (which hereinafter will be referred to as the Act ) apply to the three premises which formed the subject matter of three separate proceedings in the Courts below; and, if so, which clause thereof. The common landlord is the appellant in each case, the respondent in each case being the tenant of the particular tenement.

2. In order to appreciate the points of law at issue between the parties, it is necessary to state the relevant facts shown of all details relating to the basic rent and the standard rent fixed at different stages of the proceedings. Those details are not necessary for the determination of these appeals. The undisputed facts are that the appellant is seized and possessed of several municipal holdings collectively known as the Karnani Mansions, 25-A, Park Street, together with adjoining premises situated at the junction of Park Street and Free School Street in the city of Calcutta. There are about 210 flats of different types and shop-rooms in the s



























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