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

1985 Supreme(SC) 306

R. S. PATHAK, A. N. SEN, P. N. BHAGWATI
Mohinder Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent


Advocates:
G.K.BANSAL, MIRA AGRAWAL, PREM MALHOTRA, RAKESH K.SHARMA, S.M.Ashri

JUDGMENT

AMARENDRA NATH SEN, J. :— The constitutional validity of S. 1(3) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 has been challenged in these writ petitions. This question which is common to all the writ petitions is the only question which arises for consideration and these writ petitions are accordingly being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. The question has been urged as a pure question of law. In that view of the matter it does not become necessary to refer the facts of any of the writ petitions.

3. Section 1(3) as originally enacted in the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brievity as the Act) was in the following terms :-

"Nothing in this Act shall apply to :-

(i) any residential building the construction of which is completed on or after the commencement of this Act for a period of ten years from the date of its completion;

(ii) any non-residential building construction of which is completed after the 31st March, 1962

(iii) any rented land let out on or after 31st March, 1962."

4. This provision was amended by the Amending Act of 1978 (Act 16 of 1978) to read as follows :-

"(3) Nothing in thi


























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