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

1951 Supreme(All) 233

SAPRU, AGARWALA
RAM KRISHNA – Appellant
Versus
RADHAMAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
P.N.SHUKLA, S.N.MISRA, Sat Narain Misra

AGARWALA J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution, praying that it may be declared that the United Provinces (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947 is ultra vires and null and void and the opposite parties be directed by suitable order or writ of mandamus not to enforce any decree or order passed under this Act and the applicant be declared entitled to enjoy his own property for personal use.

( 2 ) THE facts of the case are simple. The applicant is the owner of house No. 112/224 situated in sarup Nagar. The house was constructed, according to the applicant, for his own use and enjoyment but it was given out on rent temporarily by him to one Asan Das at an agreed rent of rs. 170 per month arid Asan Das continued as a tenant for five or six months. But during his tenancy he surreptitiously, according to the applicant, let in Radhamal, opposite party No. 1, without the knowledge and consent of the applicant. That, however, appears to have been condoned because the applicant entered into an agreement with Radhamal for the payment of rent at the rate of Rs. 170 per month. This rent was paid for some time but later on the opposite party No. 1 appl






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