G.L.OZA, SABYASACHI MUKHARJEE
B. R. Mehta – Appellant
Versus
Atma Devi – Respondent
Judgement
SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J. :- What is the true meaning of the expression tenant has before or after the commencement of the Act, built, acquired vacant possession of, or been allotted, a residence in terms of Cl. (h) of S. 14(l) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter called the Act) is the question raised in this appeal in the backdrop of interesting set of facts. This is an appeal by the tenant against the judgment and order dated 6th April, 1987 of the Delhi High Court. To the facts first, however, we must go to appreciate the point. The appellant was at all material times since 1968 a tenant of the ground floor of premises No. 2/14, Kalkaji Extension, New Delhi. The premises had been let out in April, 1968 to the appellant at a monthly rent of Rs. 340/- per month by one Shri R. N. Kurra, deceased husband of respondent No. 1 and father of respondents Nos. 2 to 8. The premises consist of two bed rooms, one drawing room, one dining room, one kitchen, two bath rooms and court-yard at the back and porch in the front and one store and also one verandah. It is the case of the appellant that originally the appellant had occupied these along with his wife, his aged mother
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.