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

1956 Supreme(Bom) 136

P.B.GAJENDRAGADKAR, B.N.GOKHALE
Vinayak Gopal Limaye – Appellant
Versus
Laxman Kashinath Athavale – Respondent


Judgment -

1. These two civil revisional applications along with tour others have been ordered to be placed before a Division Bench because it appeared that they raised a common question of law under Section 6 Sub-section (1) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act (57 of 1947). In all these cases, one of the questions which arose for decision in the Courts below was whether the lease in question attracted the provisions of the Rent Act, and naturally the decision of this question depended on the construction of Section 6 (1). Section 6 Sub-section (1) provides that, in areas specified in Schedule I, Part II of the Act shall apply to premises let for residence, education, business, trade or storage. If the lease in question can be regarded as falling within the purview of Section 6 (1) then the provisions of Part II would apply. If, on the other hand, the lease does not fall within Section 6 (1), the provisions of Part II would be inapplicable. All the leases in these cases can be broadly described as building leases, and the decisions under revision disclose a sharp difference of opinion on the question as to whether a building lease can attract the provision

















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