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

2013 Supreme(P&H) 1538

RAKESH KUMAR GARG
Radhey Shyam – Appellant
Versus
Sumitra Devi – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant :Mr. Mukesh Mittal, Advocate

Rakesh Garg, J.

1. By filing this revision petition, the tenant has challenged the order dated 2.9.2011 of the Rent Controller, Narnaul ordering his eviction from the demised premises and the order dated 30.3.2013 of the Appellate Authority, Narnaul, dismissing his appeal against the aforesaid order of the Rent Controller. The respondent-landlady filed the present petition under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction), Act, 1973 (for short the 'Act') for ejectment of the petitioner from the tenanted premises (i.e. shop and go-down) situated in Mandi Narnaul. In the petition, it was pleaded that the demised premises were rented out to the petitioner on a monthly rent of ` 225/- w.e.f. 1.9.1993 on the basis of a written rent note dated 18.9.1983. Subsequently, the rent was increased to ` 3750/- per annum. After the death of the original landlord, namely, Devi Dayal, his wife Sumitra i.e. respondent became the landlady of the demised premises.

2. It was further pleaded that the petitioner was in arrears of rent since 1.4.2008 and has failed to pay house tax and fire tax and thus, was liable to be ejected from the demised premises on the ground of nonpayment of arr



































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