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

1963 Supreme(P&H) 50

HARBANS SINGH
Hari Singh – Appellant
Versus
Military Estate Officer, Delhi – Respondent


Advocates:
B.C. Chawla, for Petitioners; H.S. Doabia, Addl. Advocate General, for Respondents.

ORDER :- The petitioners in this case were the sub-lessees of one Behari Lal to whom the land in dispute had been leased by the Military Estate Officer, Delhi Circle, having jurisdiction over the land in dispute which is situated within Ambala Cantonment. This Behari Lal was evicted some time back and it is admitted that till his eviction the lease money was being paid by the present petitioners to Behari Lal and after he had been evicted they did not pay any amount to anyone. Treating them to be unauthorised occupants notice was served on them by the military authorities concerned under Section 4 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1958 (Central Act 32 of 1958), hereinafter referred to as the Act, and after giving them a hearing the eviction order was passed. They went up in appeal to the District Judge, who is the appellate authority under Section 9 or the Act. The only ground taken before this authority was that the petitioners had not been given propel opportunity. This argument was negatived and their appeal was dismissed. Thereafter they filed the present writ challenging the order of eviction mainly on two grounds. The first that the Act was ultr
















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