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

1966 Supreme(MP) 41

R.J.Bhave
Munnalal Tiwari – Appellant
Versus
Laxminarayan Lohia – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
R. P. Tiwari for appellant.

ORDER

1. The application filed by the appellant before the Rent Controlling Authority under section 24 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act') was dismissed by the Rent Controlling Authority. The appeal before the District- Judge, Jabalpur, was also unsuccessful. Hence this second appeal.

2. In the application filed before the Rent Controlling Authority the appellant, who is the landlord, had prayed that the tenant be ordered to deposit the monthly rent of January 1966 without prejudice to the rights of the appellant. Both the lower Courts came to the conclusion that there was no provision under the Act conferring jurisdiction on the Rent Controlling Authority to entertain the kind of application filed by the landlord.

3. Shri R.P. Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant, urged before me that sub-section (1) of section 24 of the Act makes it obligatory on the tenant to pay the rent to the landlord on the day he is bound to do so under the contract of tenancy or, in the absence of such a contract, by the 15th day of the month next following the month for which it is payable. Shri Tiwari says that when an obligation is created, there m




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