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

1991 Supreme(SC) 572

K.RAMASWAMY, YOGESHWAR DAYAL
Chand Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Gulzar Singh – Respondent


Advocates:
C.B.Nath, K.R.NAGARAJA, M.L.BHARGAV, R.S.HEGDE, RANDHIR JAIN

Judgment

The appellant-landlord had filed an application under Section 14(1)(b )of the Delhi Rent Control Act. 1958 (for short the Act) for ejectment of the respondents. All the three Courts concurrently found that Gulzar Singh was the sole tenant. The Rent Controller and the Tribunal-found that he sublet the, demised premises to Avtar Singh, his brother and therefore ordered ejectment. The High Court found that the tenant was in exclusive possession of the premises bearing No. W. Z. 258/4, Subash Bazar, Nangal Kaya, New Jail Road, New Delhi, and that he did not sublet the premises to Avtar Singh. On that premise the petition for ejectment was dismissed. Thus this appeal by special leave under Art. 136 of the Constitution.

2. Shri Nagaraja, learned Counsel for the appellant has contended that the High Court has committed a gross error in interfering with the concurrent finding of fact recorded by the Addl. Rent Controller and the Rent Control Tribunal that the tenant, Gulzar Singh has sublet the premises in question to his brother, Avtar Singh and that it is not open to the High Court to interfere with the concurrent finding of fact. He placed reliance on Sec. 18 of the Evidence Act










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