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

1999 Supreme(All) 271

V.M.SAHAI
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHTHROUGH LABOUR COMMISSIONER – Appellant
Versus
OM PRAKASH SHARMA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.D.Mandhyan, R.K.AWASTHI

V. M. SAHAI, J.

( 1 ) HEARD Sri R. K. Awasthi standing counsel for the petitioner and Sri B. D. Mandhyan, learned counsel for respondent No. 1.

( 2 ) THE landlord respondent No. 1 filed application under Section 21 (8) of the U. P. Urban buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 for fixation of standard rent of the accommodation in dispute and prayed that the standard rent fixed earlier at Rs. 356 per month be enhanced in accordance with law. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer by his judgment dated 8. 8. 1990 fixed the standard rent to be Rs. 1,070 per month. The petitioner filed an appeal along with an application under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act supported with an affidavit as the appeal was beyond time by twelve days. The application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been rejected and appeal has been dismissed as time barred by the District judge by his Judgment dated 13. 3. 1991. The petitioner has challenged the judgment of the appellate court by the present writ petition.

( 3 ) THE appellate court dismissed the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act disbelieving the stand of the petitioner that the Assistant District Gover










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