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

1981 Supreme(SC) 126

A.V.VARADARAJAN, S.MURTAZA FAZAL ALI, V.BALAKRISHNA ERADI
Satpal – Appellant
Versus
Hira Lal – Respondent


Judgment

FAZAL ALI, J.:- We have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the judgments of the courts below. We find no merit is this appeal. Special leave appears to have been granted only on the question of notice which no longer survives in view of a 7-Judge Bench decision of this court holding that in cases governed by the Rent Act, no notice under S. 106 T. P. Act is necessary unless expressly so provided. The appeal is accordingly dismissed but, in the circumstances, without any order as to costs.

2. Time till 30th September, 1981 is allowed to vacate the premises and to hand over vacant possession to the respondent-landlord, subject to filing the usual undertaking within six weeks from today. In the meantime, the appellant shall pay compensation equivalent to rent regularly and will also carry out all necessary repairs at his own costs without being reimbursed by the respondent.

Appeal dismissed.

For Citation : AIR 1981 SC 1738

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