Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.23 seconds)
Documents citing Vinod Kumar And Anr. vs Sat Pal on 27 October, 2004

Uttam Chand (Dead) Through Lrs. Ashok ... vs Jawahar Lal And Ors. on 4 July, 2007

15. In the instant case, the legal heirs of the tenant took the stand that the demised premises was let out by the landlord to one of the legal heirs of Uttam Chand and they have failed to prove that stand. There is no evidence available on the record which proves that the demised premises was let out by the landlord to Uttam Chand. There is also no evidence that the business being run in the shop is a joint family business. Rather, as per the evidence of the Sales Tax Department, earlier the business was being run by Hari Kishan as sole proprietor and after his death, the same business was being run by Ashok Kumar as sole proprietor. Thus, in my opinion, I do not find any force in the contention raised by the counsel for the petitioners supported by the judgments of this Court in Anil Kumar v. Sita Devi and Anr. (2006-3) 144 P.L.R. 478 and Vinod Kumar and Anr. v. Sat Pal (2005-1) 139 P.L.R. 492, that in the instant case the landlord has not proved the ingredients of sub-letting. Undisputedly, Ashok Kumar is not the legal heir of deceased Hari Kishan and parting of the exclusive possession of the demised premises to him by the legal heirs of Hari Kishan for consideration amounts to sub-letting.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 1 - S K Mittal - Full Document

Abhey Singh vs Shri Arjun Singh Kirpa Ram Charitable ... on 24 February, 2009

6. The cases cited by counsel for both sides are brought out only for rendering a comprehensive judgment. The counsel for the revision petitioner refers to a decision in Vinod Kumar and others Vs. Sat Pal 2005 (1) PLR 492 to the effect that without proof of factual parting with possession to the sub tenant, the case of sub- tenancy itself could not be said to be established.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - K Kannan - Full Document
1