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

1979 Supreme(All) 620

MURLIDHAR
NAND RANI – Appellant
Versus
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MORADABAD – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
H.C.Rastogi, S.P.GUPTA

MURLIDHAR, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a landlords petition under Article 226 of the Constitution directed against an order dated 20-9-1977 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Moradabad in proceedings under Section 21 of Act No. XIII of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ).

( 2 ) THE brief relevant facts are these: The petitioner owns a shop in Sambhal town which the respondent No. 2 has been occupying as a tenant since near about 1949 carrying on business of ban, Rassi, Dalia etc. the present rent being Rs. 8/- per month. The petitioner applied under section 21 for release of the shop for setting up her daughters son Gopal Kumar in business on the ground that she was a lonely widow and had virtually though not formally adopted Gopal kumar and wished him to stay with her at Sambal and take care of her. Respondent No. 2 contested the matter. The Prescribed Authority found that the petitioner had only rental income of about Rs. 75/- per month, that Gopal had completed his education, and has been living with the petitioner and that and in substance the petitioner needed the shop for herself as she wanted to carry out business by her daughters son and her need was genuine and bona fide. On






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