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

2000 Supreme(All) 1175

R.H.ZAIDI
OM PRAKASH – Appellant
Versus
II ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, SAHARANPUR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Rajesh Randon, VIRENDRA KUMAR

R. H. ZAIDI, J.

( 1 ) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents.

( 2 ) BY means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners pray for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the judgment and order dated 5. 3. 1999, whereby the revision filed by the contesting respondents was allowed by the revisional court and the suit for ejectment was decreed.

( 3 ) IT appears that respondent Nos. 3 and 4 filed a suit for ejectment and recovery of rent on the ground of default and material alteration diminishing the value of the building in question. The suit was contested by the defendants-petitioners, who filed their written statements controverting the facts stated in the plaint and pleading that they were not the defaulters nor they have made any material alteration which diminished the value of the building. It was also pleaded that they were entitled to the benefit of sub-section (4) of Section 20 of the U. P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972), (for short the act ). Several other pleas were also




































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