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

2010 Supreme(SC) 1027

B.S.CHAUHAN, P.SATHASIVAM
Nirmal Jeet Singh Hoon – Appellant
Versus
Irtiza Hussain – Respondent


ORDER

Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J. —

1. Delay condoned.

2. The application for permission to appear in person and argue is allowed.

3. Facts and circumstances giving rise to the case are as follows:

(A) Irtiza Hussain, Zaheeda Khatoon and Murtuza Hussain (hereinafter referred to as ‘respondents’), were the original plaintiffs in Small Cause Case No. 41 of 1974 under Section 21 (1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter called the Act 1972). Nirmal Jeet Singh Hoon, (hereinafter referred to as ‘petitioner’), was defendant No. 3 in the above-mentioned case which was Suit for ejectment and arrears of rent filed by the respondents/plaintiffs. The case of the plaintiffs/respondents was that defendant no. 1, namely, Shri Ram Prasad (dead-nothing on record to show as to whether his legal heirs had been substituted) and defendant no. 2, namely, M/s United Hotels Pvt. Ltd., had illegally sub-let the suit property to the petitioner; and defendants had also refused to pay the amount due as rent and they should, therefore, be evicted from the suit property.

(B) Smt. Sarvari Khatoon, Plaintiff no. 4 in Small Cause Case No. 41 of 1974 died during


























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