Uop Llc vs Additional Director Of Income Tax on 8 December, 2006
To the similar effect is another decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Natha Singh v. Financial Commr., Taxation (supra)
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 214 (2.44 seconds)Smt. Geeta Devi And Another vs Additional District Judge / Special ... on 17 October, 2019
24. Applying the principles of law laid down in the above referred judgments of this Court and of Hon'ble Supreme Court on the facts of the present case as discussed above, I do not find any merit in this writ petition. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed.
Kuldeep Singh Hooda vs Shri Narender Mehlawat on 27 April, 2018
Payment of rent is necessary to create
relationship between the landlord and tenant and this fact has been
authoritatively held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Natha Singh and
others vs. The Financial Commissioner, Taxation, Punjab and others, 1976
PLJ 293.
M/S. New Delhi Television Ltd., New ... vs Dcit, New Delhi on 14 July, 2017
To the similar effect is another decision of Hon‟ble
Supreme Court in the case of Natha Singh v. Financial Commissioner,
Taxation AIR 1976 SC 1053.
Bhura & Others vs Yamin And Others on 25 February, 2026
In this context, the authoritative pronouncement of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Natha Singh vs. Financial Commissioner,
Taxation, Punjab (supra) assumes determinative significance, wherein it
has been unequivocally held that the existence of a valid relationship of
landlord and tenant must be substantiated by cogent evidence, and that
proof of payment of rent constitutes an essential and indispensable
ingredient of tenancy. The mere description of a person as "Gair Marusi" in
the revenue record, absent evidence of rent or other essential attributes of
tenancy, does not ipso facto establish the legal status of a tenant in the eye
of law, relevant extract is as under:-
(O&M;) Dalel Singh & Anr vs Kalu & Ors on 11 February, 2015
20. Learned counsel for the appellant cited 1976 P.L.J. 293
Natha Singh & others v. The Financial Commissioner,
Taxation, Punjab & others, 1978 P.L.R. 98 Than Singh & others
v. Nandu & others, 1983 P.L.J. 182 Mukat Singh v. Shmt.
Dev Raj And Others vs Mahant Rajinder Gir And Others on 11 May, 2016
(Vide: Arjan Singh v. Kartar Singh & Ors., AIR 1951 SC 193; and
Natha Singh & Ors. v. The Financial Commissioner, Taxation,
Punjab & Ors., AIR 1976 SC 1053)."
Mandhata Singh & Anr. vs Bans Bahal Singh on 10 March, 2017
"38. An application under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC is to be considered at the time of hearing of appeal on merits so as to find whether the documents and/or the evidence sought to be adduced have any relevance/bearing on the issues involved. The admissibility of additional evidence does not depend upon the relevancy to the issue on hand, or on the fact, whether the applicant had an opportunity for adducing such evidence at an earlier stage or not, but it depends upon whether or not the Appellate Court requires the evidence sought to be adduced to enable it to pronounce judgment or for any other substantial cause. The true test, therefore is, whether the Appellate Court is able to pronounce judgment on the materials before it without taking into consideration the additional evidence sought to be adduced. Such occasion would arise only if on examining the evidence as it stands the court comes to the conclusion that some inherent lacuna or defect becomes apparent to the Court. (Vide: Arjan Singh v. Kartar Singh & Ors., AIR 1951 SC 193; and Natha Singh & Ors. v. The Financial Commissioner, Taxation, Punjab & Ors., AIR 1976 SC 1053).
Rajeshwar Singh vs Ramesh Kumari (Since Deceased) Thr Lrs ... on 19 January, 2024
"5. The afore-mentioned provision have been subject-matter of
interpretation of the Supreme Court in the case of K.
Venkataramiah v. A. Seetharama Reddy, AIR 1963 Supreme
Court 1526; Natha Singh v. The Financial Commissioner,
Taxation, AIR 1976 Supreme Court 1053; Land Acquisition
Officer v. H. Narayanaiah etc., AIR 1976 Supreme Court 2403
and P. Purushottam Reddy v. Pratap Steels Ltd., (2002(2) RCR
(Civil) 70 (SC): 2002(2) SCC 686. On the basis of the afore-
Gudi Satyanarayana Reddy vs Maggidi Narsaiah Died on 30 July, 2024
The true test, therefore is, whether the Appellate Court is
able to pronounce judgment on the materials before it
without taking into consideration the additional evidence
sought to be adduced. Such occasion would arise only if on
examining the evidence as it stands the court comes to the
conclusion that some inherent lacuna or defect becomes
apparent to the Court. (Vide:Arjan Singh v. Kartar Singh &
Ors., AIR 1951 SC 193; and Natha Singh & Ors. v. The
Financial Commissioner, Taxation, Punjab & Ors., AIR 1976
SC 1053).