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

1993 Supreme(SC) 861

K.RAMASWAMY, N.P.SINGH
Umesh Chand Gandhi – Appellant
Versus
Additional District And Sessions Judge – Respondent


Advocates:
D.K.GARG, JOSEPH VELLAPALLY, SANGITA KUMAR, SATISH CHANDRA AGRAWAL, VIJAY VERMA

ORDER

1. The appellant/tenant had the demised premises on a monthly rent of Rs. 40 from Ram Lal, the landlord. Ram Lal initiated action for ejectment of the appellant in the Court of the Small Cause (District Munsif), Saharanpur under the U.P. (Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1947. Pending proceedings this Act was repealed and U.P. (Urban Building Regulation of Letting Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, for short the Act came into force w.e.f. July 15, 1972. Section 39 permitted the appellant to deposit the arrears, interest accrued thereon and full costs of the suit within one month from the date of the commencement of the Act. As on date a sum of Rs. 2,048 was due. Due to error in calculation a sum of Rs. 1,944 was deposited within one month leaving a deficit of Rs. 104. The Trial Court decreed ejectment, but on revision, the Dist. Judge held that the appellant had substantially complied with Section 39. A sum of Rs. 104 was not deposited due to bonafide mistake of calculation. Though alternative remedy was available, Ram Lal instead filed a writ petition in the High Court under Article 227 in Civil Misc. Suit Petition No. 9296/79. When the matter came up before the learne


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