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

1983 Supreme(All) 471

N. D. OJHA
Mohammad Ismail – Appellant
Versus
District Judge – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
B.D. Mandhyan, Advocate, for the Petitioner; N.C. Rajvanshi and Standing Counsel, for the Respondents

ORDER

N.D. Ojha, J. - Respondent 3 is the landlord of a shop of which the petitioner is the tenant. An application was made by respondent 3 in the year 1976 for release of the said shop under cls. (a) and (b) and sub-s. (1) of S. 21. U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the ground that it was needed by him bona fide for his own use. His case, as is apparent from the order of the Prescribed Authority dated 10th Feb. 1978, a copy whereof has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition, was that he was badly in need of the sad shop for carrying on business along with his brothers and that they had no other shop at their disposal for the said purpose. His case further was that the petitioner was not carrying on any business in the said shop and was keeping it locked. He further asserted that the petitioner had taken on rent another shop in the name of Chandra Kiran Devi near the railway station and did not really require the shop in question. By asserting these facts respondent 3 apparently emphasised that great hardship will be caused to him if the shop in question was not released and that on the other hand

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