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

1987 Supreme(SC) 546

A.P.SEN, S.NATARAJAN
Beopar Sahayak Private LTD. – Appellant
Versus
Vishwa Nath – Respondent


Advocates:
B.R.AGRAWAL, D.N.Mishra, Prithvi Raj, R.B.MAHATO, S.N.KACKAR, SOBHA DIXIT, U.R.Lalit

Judgement

NATARAJAN, J. :- The only question for consideration in this appeal by special leave is whether the order of release passed by the Prescribed Authority under the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (for short the Act hereafter) is a null and void order because the Prescribed Authority had no jurisdiction to pass the order as he did not possess the requisite qualification for being appointed as such authority.

2. Premises No. 58/3 Birhana Road, Kanpur is a three storeyed building and in addition it has a mezzanine floor as well. As early as in 1947, when the respondents who are brothers were minors, a portion of the ground floor and the entire first floor was leased out to the predecessor concern of the appellant by the father of the respondents. While the first floor was leased out for residential purposes, a portion of the ground floor was leased out for non-residential purposes. The respondents sought recovery of possession from the appellant of the leased portions for their residential needs and business purposes. It may be mentioned here that the respondents were already having their residence in the second floor and their business

























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