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

1972 Supreme(Del) 205

V.S.DESHPANDE
NATHU KHAN – Appellant
Versus
MOHAMMND ISMAIL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
L.D.ADLEKHA, S.S.Chadha

V. S. DESHPANDE,j. (ORAL)

( 1 ) ONE Rahim Khan was a tenant under the predecessor-iri-title of the respondent Mohamad Ismail from before 1-12-1962 when section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act first beacme applicable to Delhi. The respondent landlord sent a notice dated 8-1-1964 to Rahim Khan alleging that the latter had not paid arrears of rent in respect of the premises and staling that if the arears of rent are not paid within two months of the service of the notice, then proceedings for recovery of rent and for eviction would be taken against him. This notice was a composite notice under clause (a) of the proviso to section 14 (1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter called the Act) and also a reasonable notice according to the principle underlying section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. As the notice was not complied with, the landord filed a petition for eviction against Rahim Khan before the Rent Controller under the provisions of the Act. The landlord proved the service of this notice on Rahim Khan. In the application for eviction, the landlord had alleged the service of the said notice on Rahim Khan but Rahim Khan had generally denied the allegations reg























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