M.M.KUMAR
Harjit Singh – Appellant
Versus
Daya Ram Sat Narain – Respondent
M.M.Kumar, J.
1. This judgment would dispose of three civil revision petitions namely Civil Revision Nos. 1445, 1561 and 1810 of 1993 as the common question of law and facts have been raised by the landlord petitioner against the defendant-tenants who has sought their ejectment claiming to be a specified landlord under Section 13-A of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for brevity the Act). For the sake of convenience, the facts are being taken from C.R. No. 1445 of 1993. The Rent Controller in his order dated 15.12.1992 has repelled the claim of the landlord-petitioner by dismissing his application in which prayer was made for eviction of the tenant respondent. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 15.12.1992 dismissing his application, the landlord petitioner has filed the present petitions by invoking the provisions of Section 18A of the Act.
2. The findings which have attained finality against the tenant-respondent and have not been challenged before this Court may first be noticed, The Rent Controller has held that he landlord-petitioner is a specified landlord within the meaning of Section 2 (hh) of the Act as he is entitled to receive the rent in respec
Dr. Jagjit Singh Mehta V/s. Dev Brat Sharma
Sarjit Singh V/s. Gian Singh Gandhi
Bhoop Chand V/s. Kay Pee Cee Investments
Hari Shankar V/s. Rao Girdhari Lal Chowdhary
Ram Gopal Sharma V/s. Sukhdev Raj Rudra
Shiv Sarup Gupta V/s. Dr. Mahesh Chand Gupta
Sarla Ahuja V/s. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
State Of Kerala V/s. K.M. Charia Abdullah And Co.
Vinod Kumar Arora V/s. Surjit Kaur
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.