Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.23 seconds)
Documents citing Srinivasa Baliga vs Gopalakrishna Pai on 4 October, 1985

B. Om Prakash Bajaj vs Gp Capt. P.M. Mathai on 30 March, 2000

10. It is no doubt true that as indicated above, the landlord will have to further establish that he is an Armed Personnel and his requirement is bona fide. However, he need not establish his reasonableness and hardship, as required is to be proved under Section 21(1)(h). To substantiate his argument, the learned Counsel placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in Srinivasa Baliga v Gopalakrishna Pai, wherein this Court had considered Section 21(1)(h) and held that what is required to be proved is genuine need and. if the need is established intention or desire automatically follows.
Karnataka High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 1 - M P Chinnappa - Full Document
1