Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 55 (0.65 seconds)
Documents citing Baldev Sahai Bangia vs R.C. Bhasin on 16 April, 1982

Soli Behram Sukhadwala vs Nitin D. Sohni And Ors on 1 October, 2024

Judgment in Baldev Sahai Bangia (supra) is rendered in view of the provisions of Section 14 of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, providing for eviction if tenant or member of his family is not found to be residing in the premises for a period of six months before the date of filing of eviction application. The judgment in my view, would have no application to the present case. Even otherwise, upon giving wider meaning to the term 'family' I am unable to accept that Plaintiff is either member of family of Dinamai or resided with her as her family member in the suit premises over a period of time.
Bombay High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M.D. Choksey Stonstruction Company ... vs Soli Behram Sukhadwala on 1 October, 2024

Judgment in Baldev Sahai Bangia (supra) is rendered in view of the provisions of Section 14 of Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, providing for eviction if tenant or member of his family is not found to be residing in the premises for a period of six months before the date of filing of eviction application. The judgment in my view, would have no application to the present case. Even otherwise, upon giving wider meaning to the term 'family' I am unable to accept that Plaintiff is either member of family of Dinamai or resided with her as her family member in the suit premises over a period of time.
Bombay High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. Taruna Rani vs Sh. Ved Prakash on 7 December, 2018

Hon'ble Supreme  Court had held that the word 'family; has to be given not a restricted but a wider  meaning so as to include not only the head of the family but all members of   descendents  from  the  common  ancestor  who   are  living  together  in  the   same  house (Baldev Sahai Bangia v. R. C. Bhasin, AIR 1982 SC 1091). Therefore,  even if it is presumed that son of the petitoner is not finanacially dependent upon   the petitoner then it does not mean that he is not dependent upon the petitioner   for requirement of commercial space unless the respondent proves that son of  petitioner   has   alternative   suitable   accommodation   to   satisfy   bonafide  ARC. No. 86/17 Taruna Rani Vs. Ved Prakash                                 Page 8/13 requirement.
Delhi District Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. Taruna Rani vs Sh. Subhash Chand on 7 December, 2018

Hon'ble Supreme  Court had held that the word 'family; has to be given not a restricted but a wider  meaning so as to include not only the head of the family but all members of   descendents  from  the  common  ancestor  who   are  living  together  in  the   same  house (Baldev Sahai Bangia v. R. C. Bhasin, AIR 1982 SC 1091). Therefore,  even if it is presumed that son of the petitoner is not finanacially dependent upon   the petitoner then it does not mean that he is not dependent upon the petitioner   for requirement of commercial space unless the respondent proves that son of  petitioner   has   alternative   suitable   accommodation   to   satisfy   bonafide  ARC. No. 85/17 Taruna Rani Vs. Subhash Chand Page 8/13 requirement.
Delhi District Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. Taruna Rani vs Sh. Mahander Behel on 7 December, 2018

Hon'ble Supreme  Court had held that the word 'family; has to be given not a restricted but a wider  meaning so as to include not only the head of the family but all members of   descendents  from  the  common  ancestor  who   are  living  together  in  the   same  house (Baldev Sahai Bangia v. R. C. Bhasin, AIR 1982 SC 1091). Therefore,  even if it is presumed that son of the petitoner is not finanacially dependent upon   the petitoner then it does not mean that he is not dependent upon the petitioner   for requirement of commercial space unless the respondent proves that son of  petitioner   has   alternative   suitable   accommodation   to   satisfy   bonafide  ARC. No. 87/17 Taruna Rani Vs. Mahander Behel Page 8/13 requirement.
Delhi District Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. Taruna Rani vs Sh. Shehjad Ali on 7 December, 2018

Hon'ble Supreme  Court had held that the word 'family; has to be given not a restricted but a wider  meaning so as to include not only the head of the family but all members of   descendents  from  the  common  ancestor  who   are  living  together  in  the   same  house (Baldev Sahai Bangia v. R. C. Bhasin, AIR 1982 SC 1091). Therefore,  even if it is presumed that son of the petitoner is not finanacially dependent upon   the petitoner then it does not mean that he is not dependent upon the petitioner   for requirement of commercial space unless the respondent proves that son of  petitioner   has   alternative   suitable   accommodation   to   satisfy   bonafide  ARC. No. 82/17 Taruna Rani Vs. Shehjad Ali and Ans. Page 8/13 requirement.
Delhi District Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sh. Gopal Kishan vs Sh. Gulab Baldeva on 15 December, 2018

Hon'ble Supreme  Court had held that the word 'family; has to be given not a restricted but a wider  meaning so as to include not only the head of the family but all members of   descendents  from the   common   ancestor  who   are   living   together  in   the   same  house (Baldev Sahai Bangia v. R. C. Bhasin, AIR 1982 SC 1091).
Delhi District Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sh. Gopal Kishan vs Sh. Kalu Ram on 15 December, 2018

Hon'ble Supreme  Court had held that the word 'family; has to be given not a restricted but a wider  meaning so as to include not only the head of the family but all members of   descendents  from the   common   ancestor  who   are   living   together  in   the   same  house (Baldev Sahai Bangia v. R. C. Bhasin, AIR 1982 SC 1091).
Delhi District Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 Next