ARUN KUMAR
SWARN KANTA MEHRA – Appellant
Versus
VINAY KUMAR MAHENDRA – Respondent
( 1 ) THIS is yet another case in which inspite of the fact that the premises was let out under Section 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), after obtaining permission of the Controller, the respondent/tenant has continued in possession of the premises till date though the period of limited tenancy expired on 30th April 1983.
( 2 ). Briefly the facts are that the appellant is the owner/landlady of a double storey house bearing No. G-211, Naraina Residential Scheme, Naraina Vihar, New Delhi. The appellant was occupying the first floor of the said property. She applied to the Controller on 20th April 1979 under Section 21 of the Act for permission to let out the ground floor of the said property at a monthly rent of Rs. 1150. 00 exclusive of water and electricity charges for residential purposes to the respondent with effect from the date of permission for a period of four years. On 26th April 1979 statements of the appellant as well as the respondent were recorded by the Controller and by an order passed on the said date, the Controller granted permission under Section 21 of the Act to the appellant to let out ground floor of her said
REFERRED TO : Sunil Puri and Ors. v. M/s Modi Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd.
Shrisht Dhawan v. M/s Shaw Bros.
Gappulal v. Thakurji Shriji Dwarkadheeshji
Raj Kumari Walia v. P.N.Premanandan
Shri O. Bahree v. M/s Rikhi Bros.
J.R.Vohra v. India Export House Pvt. Ltd. and Anr.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.