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

2018 Supreme(All) 520

SANGEETA CHANDRA
ATUL RASTOGI – Appellant
Versus
MOHAMMAD SALIM – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Arvind Srivastava III for the Petitioners; W.H. Khan and Sunil Kumar Singh for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra, J.—This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners-tenants challenging the order passed by the Prescribed Authority dated 11.5.2017 in P.A. Case No. 4 of 2014 as well as the judgment and order dated 9.1.2018 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Amroha in Rent Control Appeal No. 5 of 2017.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the grand-father of the petitioners, namely, Vishambhar Nath had taken a shop No. 4 from the Muttawalli of the waqf of late Latif Ahmed on 4.5.1939. Thereafter, the father of the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 was the tenant till his death and the petitioners became the tenants of the shop in question. There was never any default in payment of rent. The original owner of the property in question was Haji Abdul Latif, son of Haji Khuda Baksh, who had seven sons. Late Haji Abdul Latif created a waqf of his entire property during his life time including the shop in question bearing No. 4. This Waqf Deed was duly registered before the U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board, Lucknow on 14.1.1992. After the death of Haji Abdul Latif, the elder son Abdul Hamee



















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