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

1967 Supreme(Del) 188

I.D.DUA
PRITAM SINGH – Appellant
Versus
SURAJPERSHAD – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
M.L.SHARMA, P.C.Softer

I. D. Dua, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS second appeal has been preferred under section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 195s (hereinafter called the Act) from the order of the Rent Control Tribunal dated 24th July, 1967 dismissing the appellant s appeal and affirming the order of the First Additional Rent Controller dated 23rd September, 1966 holding that the landlord bonafide required the permises in question for occupation as residence for himself and for his family members dependent upon him and that he was not in possession of reasonably suitable accommodation and on his finding, making an order of eviction against the tenant with a direction to vacate the premises Within six months from the date of the order. Both the Rent Controller and the Rent Control Tribunal left the parties to bear their own costs.

( 2 ) ON second appeal, which would not lie under the statute unless it involved some substantial question of law, the learned counsel for the appellant has, at the very outset, pressed his application under Order 6, Rule 17 and section 151, Code of Civil Procedure, read with Rule 2s-of the Rules framed under the Act, praying for amendment of his reply to the application for eviction pr




















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