Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.47 seconds)The Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947
The Delhi Rent Act, 1995
Section 15 in The Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
The Delhi Police Act, 1978
Section 5 in The Delhi Rent Act, 1995 [Entire Act]
Jaspal Singh vs Additional District Judge, ... on 28 September, 1984
The appellant in that case claimed the right to tenancy
held by one Nuabat Singh under the will of Naubat Singh.
This Court held that the appellant would be a tenant within
the meaning of section 3(a) of that Act only when he was an
heir but the appellant was not a son but only nephew of
Naubat Singh. The said U.P. Act also contained a provision
in section 12(2) thereof which stated that in the case of
non-residential building where a tenant carrying on a
business in the building admitted a person who was not a
member of his family as a partner or a new partner, as the
case may be, the tenant should be deemed to have ceased to
occupy the building. Under those circumstances this Court
held at page 1885 thus:
Anant Trimbak Sabnis vs Vasant Pratap Pandit on 4 July, 1979
(Underlining by us)
In Dr. Anant Trimback Sabnis v. Vasant Pratap Pandit
A.I.R. [1980] Bom. 69, the High Court of Bombay has in the
light of the section 15(1) of the Act taken the view and in
our opinion rightly that the words 'to assign or transfer in
any other manner his interest therein' in section 15(1) of
the Act had the effect of prohibiting the disposition of the
tenancy right by a will in the absence of a contract to the
contrary. The High Court of Bombay observed at pages 72 and
73 thus:-