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

1971 Supreme(All) 88

V. G. OAK, S. N. KATJU
K. L. Sehgal – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner, Allahabad – Respondent


Advocates:
S.N. Kacker and Ravi Dhavan, for Appellant; K.M. Dayal, for Respondents.

Judgement

OAK, C.J. :- The main question raised in this special appeal is whether a revision under Section 3 of the U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) can be dismissed in default. The matter relates to a certain house at Kanpur. Dr. (Smt.) Mitter is the owner of the house; and Smt. Sehgal occupied a portion of the house as Dr. (Smt.) Mifter's tenant. The landlady applied for permission under Section 3 of the Act for eviction of the tenant. The Additional District Magistrate, Kanpur passed an order on 9-12-1968 granting the requisite permission to the landlady. The tenant filed a revision against the Additional District Magistrate's order granting permission. The Commissioner, Allahabad fixed the hearing of the revision at Kanpur on 19-3-1969. When the Commissioner took up the case at Kanpur on 19-3-1969, no one appeared before him on behalf or the tenant-revisionist. The Commissioner thereupon dismissed the tenant's revision in default.

2. Against the Commissioner's order dated 19-3-1969, Smt. Sehgal filed a writ petition. The writ petition has been dismissed by a single Judge of this Court. Smt. Sehgal has, therefore, filed the pr

















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