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

2012 Supreme(P&H) 1733

L.N.MITTAL
Ram Dass Bagga – Appellant
Versus
Ram Chander – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:- Ms. Kiran Bala Jain, Advo#31;cate.
For the Respondent:- Mr. Anil Kshetarpal, Advo#31;cate.

L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral);—

Tenant Ram Dass Bagga has filed this revision petition under Section 15 (6) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (in short – the Act), having failed before both the Authorities below.

2. Respondent-landlord Ram Chander filed ejectment petition under Section 13 of the Act against tenant-petitioner seeking ejectment of the petitioner from demised shops no.2 and 3, on the ground of nonpayment of arrears of rent and bona fide requirement of the demised property for the landlord for his own business. Ground of non-payment of rent was not pressed in view of payment made by the tenant. As regards personal necessity, it was pleaded that the landlord has retired from service in Saraswati Sugar Mills and was doing no work, and therefore, he wanted to start his independent business in the demised shops.

3. The tenant controverted the ground of personal necessity of the landlord. It was also alleged that the disputed shops were let out by Kamlesh Kumari wife of the landlord and later on, both of them started receiving rent from the tenant-petitioner. It was also alleged that Kamlesh Kumari filed ejectment petition regarding adjacent shop no.1 in t













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