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

2010 Supreme(HP) 935

RAJIV SHARMA
Vipin Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Raj Kumar – Respondent


Advocates:
For the petitioner:Mr. Subhash Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Nemo.

JUDGEMENT

Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). This revision petition is directed against the order dated 19.5.2010 of the Appellate Authority (II), Una in Rent Appeal No. 3/2009.

2. Material facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the respondent-landlord (hereinafter referred to as ‘the landlord’ for convenience sake) filed the eviction petition against the petitioner-tenant (hereinafter referred to as the tenant for convenience sake) on the following grounds: . “That the respondent is in arrears of rent from June, 2002 till date @ Rs. 1065/- per month. 2. That applicant is also entitled for 10% increase after every five years from the date of commencement of tenancy i.e. 1.8.1988, in following manner:- I. 1.8.1993 to 31.7.1988 @ 10% i.e. Rs. 88. Enhancement 88/-=60x80=0048000. II. 1.8.1998 to 31.7.2003 @ 10% i.e. 968/- Enhancement 168x60=10,080/-. III. 1.8.2003 to 28.2.06 @ 10% Rs. 1065/- Enhancement 265x31=Rs. 8215/- with interest @ 9% P.A. on arrears of rent. 3. That the tenant/respondent has ceased to occupy the rented shop for a continuous period of twelve months without reasonable cause i.e. from 1st September, 2004.”

3. The tenant filed detailed reply controv




















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