SANTOSH DUGGAL
O. BAHRI – Appellant
Versus
RIKHI BROS – Respondent
( 1 ) THE appellant O. Bahree, who is the owner of property bearing No. 1/4, E. P. Railway Co-opeative House Building Society, Greater Kailash Enclave I, New Delhi, let out the same to the respondent through his attorney, Shri I. C. Bahree, after obtaining permission of the Rent Controller, Delhi under section 21 of the Act, for a limited period of three years effective from 27. 10. 1978. On the expiry of the aforesaid period, he made an application through the aforesaid attorney. Subsequently on objections by the tenant, inter alia, that the attorney could not seek possession of the property, he got his name substituted.
( 2 ) THIS application styled as an execution application was moved on 5. 1. 1982, when the tenant besides filing reply, also look up objections to the effect that the permission of the Rent Contrloller was obtained by fraudulent mis-representation that premises were available for letting for three years, for the reason that the owner was expected to retire thereafter, and that, in fact, the said owner was hardly of the age of 50, and no where near the age of superannuation, and that the pernmission granted on that assumption stood vitiated. The
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.