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

1993 Supreme(Del) 515

JASPAL SINGH
DAULAT SINGH CHADHA – Appellant
Versus
RAJENDER KUMAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
JAGJIT SINGH CHAWLA, N.L.CHAUDHARY

Jaspal Singh, J.

( 1 ) IS the appellant a lawful sub-tenant and if so, is he protected under sections 17 and 18 of the Delhi Rent Control Act? This is the question in this second appeal which needs to be decided. However, first a bird eye view of the facts.

( 2 ) RAJENDER Kumar and Radhey Shyam alongwith their mother Smt. Chandra Wati were the landlords of the premises. They had let out the same to one Sudha Rajan Jain. This was on June 1, 1978. In the year 1979 the landlords filed a petition for eviction of Sudha Rajan Jain on the ground of non-payment of rent underclause. (a) of sub-section (l)ofsection 14oftheact in which an exparte order of eviction was passed on February 8, 1980. Thereafter they moved an application for delivery of possession in execution of the said order. While that applicatibn was pending one Amarjit Singh filed objections under section 25 of the Act alleging that he had been inducted as a lawful sub-tenant by Sudha Rajan jain on the basis of the consent in writing of the landlords permitting her to sub let the premises and that even a notice as required under section 17 of the Act with regard to the creation of sub-tenancy had been not only served personal























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