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

1977 Supreme(Del) 51

T.V.R.TATACHARI, YOGESHWAR DAYAL
RAM NARAIN KHANNA – Appellant
Versus
S. ISHAR SINGH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
C.S.DUGGAL, G.S.Vohra, K.L.VOHRA

( 51 ) IT appears to us that this expression "prima facie" is coined by the courts to distinguish a finding on a question at the interlocutory stage as opposed to a finding given at the final stage of the trial. At the same time, for purposes of section 15 (1), the determination of relationship and/or arrears of rent have to be final only for the limited purpose of section 15 (1), and in that sense the finding is prima facie as opposed to the determination of the question at the end of the trial. Deshpande, J. further wen,t on to observe :"the Controller has no jurisdiction to pass the order unless he first definitively finds that the relationship of landlord and tenant exists between the parties. The consequences of the wrong practice followed by the Controller and the Rent Control Tribunal, as in the present case, are serious. A non-compliance with the order under section 15 (1) by the tenant would be visited with the penalty of striking off the defence under section 15 (7) which would result in the Controller passing an order for eviction against the tenant. If the Controller, therefore, passes an order under section 15 (1) without deciding the relationship between the parties a




































































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