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

1995 Supreme(SC) 744

G.N.RAY, S.B.MAJMUDAR
Surendra Kumar Jain Alias Sunni – Appellant
Versus
Shanti Swaroop Jain – Respondent


Advocates:
A.M.SANGHVI, AVADH BIHARI ROHTAGI, K.B.ROHTAGI, KAPIL SIBAL, P.K.JAIN, PRAVIN JAIN, RAKESH K.SHARMA

(1) LEAVE granted.

(2) RESPONDENT 1 has already entered appearance. Notice of the appeal need not be served on Respondents 2 and 3 who are formal parties and such notice on them is dispensed with.

(3) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. It appears to us that for the purpose of deciding the date of construction it is necessary to refer to Explanation l(a) of Section 2(2 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972. In the Explanation to the said section it has been indicated that the construction of a building shall be deemed to have been completed on the date on which completion thereof is reported or otherwise recorded by local authority having jurisdiction and in the case of building subject to assessment, the date on which the first assessment thereof comes into effect and where the said dates are different, the earliest of the said dates and in the absence of any such report record or assessment, the date on which it is actually occupied (not merely for the purpose of supervising the construction or granting the building under construction) for the first time.

(4) IT, therefore, appears that in terms of Explan

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