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

2008 Supreme(Del) 937

SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA
A. K. Nayar – Appellant
Versus
Mahesh Prasad – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Manu Nayar, Adv.
Mr. R.K. Saini, Advocate

JUDGMENT:

1. This Revision Petition was preferred by the petitioner against an order dated 17th November, 1999 of ARC allowing an Eviction Petition of landlord. At the time of filing of the petition on 24th April, 2000, the petitioner had contended that there was no record to show that respondent was owner of the premises. He was only attorney of the owner and had no right in the suit premises. The notice was issued to the respondent limited to the question of ownership of the suit premises.

2. The petition for eviction in respect of property no. C-3/2, Janak Puri under Section 14 (1)(e) DRC Act was filed by Sh. Mahesh Prasad Srivastava, respondent, on the ground of his bonafide requirement. The relationship of landlord and tenant was not disputed. Undisputedly , the premises was also let out for residential purpose. The bonafide requirement of the landlord was established through cogent evidence. However, the tenant had taken an objection that Sh. Mahesh Prasad Srivastava was not the owner of the premises. He was only an attorney of the owner and the petition under Section 14(1)(e) was not maintainable. Whereas, the contention of the landlord was that this property was initially










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