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

2014 Supreme(All) 57

SUDHIR AGARWAL
Vijay Kumar Gupta and Another – Appellant
Versus
Sumitra Devi and 2 Ors. – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:- Shailesh Kumar Pathak
For the Respondent:- H.P.Misrha

Sudhir Agarwal,J.

This is a tenants writ petition. The respondents-landlords instituted Rent Case No. 17 of 2003 under Section 21(1)(a) U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1972") seeking ejectment of petitioners and others from the accommodation in question on the ground of personal need. The Prescribed Authority while upholding the bona fide of personal need set up by respondents-landlords, partly allowed application vide order dated 12.04.2012 directing release of some part of tenanted accommodation so that tenants may continue to stay in left part.

2. Aggrieved by aforesaid order the respondents-landlords preferred Rent Appeal No. 11 of 2012 while the petitioners-tenants also preferred Rent Appeal No. 9 of 2013. The Lower Appellate Court by means of impugned order dated 28.10.2013 has allowed appeal of landlords and dismissed tenants' appeal. The order of Prescribed Authority has been modified by allowing landlords' release application in its entirety.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that petitioners have no other accommodation and should be allowed to continue.

4. The findings of facts












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