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

2003 Supreme(P&H) 332

M.M.KUMAR
Jagdish – Appellant
Versus
Sanjay Kumar – Respondent


Judgment

M.M.Kumar, J.

1. This is tenants petition filed under subsection (6) of Section 15 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973 (for brevity the Act) challenging concurrent findings of facts recorded by both the Courts below that the demised premises had become unfit and unsafe for human habitation. These findings have been recorded on issue No. 3 which is the sole issue that survives for consideration before this Court. The findings on Issue No. 3 is based on the report Ex.P-2/A submitted by one Shri Om Parkash, SDO, who made the spot inspection as a Local Commissioner and the statements made by PW-2 Shri Sanjay Kumar, the landlord respondent himself. The analysis of the evidence produced by both the parties has been made by the Appellate Authority, which reads as under:-

"To prove this issue, PW.1 Rajender Singh, Draftsman has proved the site planEx.Pl prepared by him according to the spot on 4.9.1995. 12. PW2 Sanjay Kumar son of Puran has categorically stated that this building was constructed about 70/80 years back and it has outlived its life. He has categorically stated that this building is not fit for human habitation and the stair-case have fallen an





















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