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

1995 Supreme(Del) 416

ARUN KUMAR
MINAKSHI – Appellant
Versus
RAMESH KHANNA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.B.DAYAL, ASHOK CHHAPARIA, MOHIUDDIN, Shellan Kumar, Sumati Anand

Mr. Arun Kumar, J.

( 1 ) SINCE a short point is involved, with the consent of the parties I have heard this matter in order to dispose of the same.

( 2 ) BY the impugned order, the Additional Rent Controller has granted leave to contest the eviction petition to the respondents-tenants. The petitioner-landlady has challenged the said order of the Additional Rent Controller by way of present petition. The Additional Rent Controller granted leave to contest the eviction petition mainly on two grounds, i. e. ownership and bonafide need to the petitioner-landlady.

( 3 ) BRIEFLY, the facts are that the petitioner is a tenant on the second floor vf the property in suit since 1st May, 1978. Previously. Smt. Kamlawati was the owner of the property. She died on 26th March, 1990. The petitioner is the daughter of Smt. Kamlawati and has always been residing in the same property alongwith her mother. According to the petitioner, she has become the owner of the property in view of a Will of Smt. Kamlawati dated 20th July, 1978. It is a registered Will, certified copy whereof has been placed on record of the Trial Court. The original Will itself was kept in the custody of the Sub-Registrar as is







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