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

2004 Supreme(Online)(SC) 71

SUPREME COURT
Judge, J
Tenant – Appellant
Versus
Mahesh Chandra Jain – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr A. K. Ganguli
For the Respondents: Mr Jitendra Sharma

1 The tenant has filed this appeal against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Allahabad by which the writ petition filed by the tenant was dismissed.

2 The factual position needs to be noted in brief.

3 Mahesh Chandra Jain (hereinafter referred to as "the landlord") filed an application for release of Shop No. 559 under S.21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (in short "the Act"). The reason for seeking eviction was that there was need to expand the clinic of his son, Dr. Jinesh Chandra Jain. The application was rejected by the prescribed authority by order dated 19-11-1992. An appeal was carried by the landlord and the same was allowed by order dated 28-5-1996. It was held that there was a bona fide need for the premises in question. A writ petition was filed. In the writ petition, it was submitted that the landlord on an earlier occasion had filed an application under S.21 of the Act which was rejected and, therefore, the subsequent application which formed the subject matter of controversy before the High Court was not maintainable. The need of the landlord was not bona fide and his son Dr. Jinesh Chandra






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