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

2002 Supreme(P&H) 1372

M.M.KUMAR
Harjit Singh – Appellant
Versus
Daya Ram Sat Narain – Respondent


Judgment

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











































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