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

1988 Supreme(SC) 156

S.RANGANATHAN, SABYASACHI MUKHARJEE
Hiralal Kapur – Appellant
Versus
Prabhu Choudhury – Respondent


Advocates:
ANIL NAURIYA, P.C.MUDGAL, RAJINDER SACHAR, REKHA PANDEY, S.C.GUPTA

Judgment

RANGANATHAN, J. - The appellant is an advocate. He is the owner of premises No. H-2/6 Model Town, Delhi. He let out a part of this premises comprising a set of rooms above the garage (which may be briefly referred to as servants quarters) and a hall on the ground floor of the building to the respondent. The letting was oral and on a monthly rent of Rs. 600/- (exclusive of electricity and water charges) from July 1976.

2. In January 1980, the landlord filed an eviction petition under proviso (e) to S. 14(l) of the Delhi Rent Control Act. He claimed of that he needed the premises bona fide for the personal residential requirements of himself and the members of his family. His case was that he was having his office at Chandni Chowk on a first floor but, as he had been advised by the doctor not to climb upstairs, he desired to move the office and library to the ground floor hall of the premises in question. He also claimed that the servants quarters were required for the use of his servants and their families.

3. The petition was resisted by the respondent on a number of grounds. We are, however, concerned here only with two of the grounds put forward by the tenant. His first sub














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