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

1991 Supreme(Del) 595

S.C.JAIN
KANWAR KUMAR SETH – Appellant
Versus
MULKH RAJ MALHOTRA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
KAILASH NARAIN TOPA, RAJIV MEHRA

S. C. Jain

( 1 ) THE facts giving rise to this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India are that the petitioner had filed a petition for eviction dated 24. 2. 86, against the respondent under Section 14 (l) (a) (b) (c) (j) of the Delhi Rent Control Act. As non payment of rent is one of the grounds of eviction, an order under Section 15 (1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act was passed on 7. 7. 87 by the Addl. Rent Controller directing the respondent to pay or deposit the entire arrears of rent @ Rs. 90. 00 per month from 1. 7. 85 upto date within one month from the date of the order and to continue to pay or deposit the future rent month by month by the 15th of each succeeding month. In compliance with that order the respondent deposited the arrears of rent w. e f. 1. 7. 85 to 31. 7. 86 @ 90. 00 p. m. on 48. 87 i. e. within one month of the date of the order.

( 2 ) THE petitioner was not satisfied with the order of the Addl. Rent Controller, as according to him, the Addl. Rent Controller should have ordered to deposit the rent @ Rs. 97. 00 am. and not @ Rs. 90. 00 and so he filed an appeal before the Rent Control Tribunal challenging the order of the Addl. Rent Contr





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