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

2006 Supreme(All) 1165

S.U.KHAN
LAXMAN – Appellant
Versus
FIRST ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE VARANASI – Respondent


S. U. KHAN, J.

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners. No one ap peared on behalf of the respondents at the time of hearing even though the cases were taken up in the revised list.

2. Both these writ petitions have been filed by tenants of the same landlords. Tenanted accommodations in both the writ petitions are separate two parts of the same house i. e. House No. D- 6/30 Mohalla Tripura Bhairvi, Rani Bhawani Gali, Varanasi. Landlords respondents No. 3 and 4 in both the writ petitions, viz. Dr. Ram Rang Sharma and Sri Bhismapitamah Sharma, filed release applications on the ground of bona fide need under Section 21 of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972. Release application filed against tenant-petitioner of the second writ petition was numbered as P. A. Case No. 43 of 1985. Release ap plication filed against Jawahar and his son Laxman was numbered as P. A. Case No. 42 of 1985. Jawahar, the father died before filing of the first writ petition and was survived by Laxman, petitioner No. 1 and other legal repre sentatives, who are petitioners 2 to 7 in the first writ petition. Jawahar and Lax man were tenants of two rooms either jointly or separately. Even if they were separate tenants, it wi












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