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

1996 Supreme(P&H) 549

G.S.SINGHVI, S.S.SUDHALKAR
Ram Sarup – Appellant
Versus
Din Dayal – Respondent


Judgment

1. In this revision petition, i.e., Civil Revision No. 2269 of 1992 and in Civil Revision No. 2216 of 1987 and 2456 of 1989, the question which is required to be decided is that in cases, where the landlord gets the premises vacated from the tenant on the ground of building having become unfit and unsafe for human habitation, and on reconstruction of the building, whether the tenant is entitled to be reinducted as a tenant in the newly constructed -building and if so, on what terms and conditions. Sub-sec. (3)(a)(iii) of S. 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to is the Punjab Act) gives a right to the landlord to seek eviction of the tenant, which reads as under :-

"(iii) in the case of any building or rented land, if he requires it to carry out any building work at the instance of the Government or local authority or any, Improvement Trust under some improvement or development scheme or if it has become unsafe or unfit for human habitation. "

This very provision is also contained in verbatim in sub-secs. (3)(c) and (6) of S. 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Haryana Act)





































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