Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.33 seconds)
Dr. Oetkar India Pvt. Ltd. vs . Skm Products Pvt. Ltd. on 1 June, 2023 cites

Rai Chand Jain vs Miss Chandra Kanta Khosla on 15 November, 1990

Again this court in Rai Chand Jain Vs. Chandra Kanta Khosla [AIR 1991 SC 747] reiterated the above and observed in paragraph 10 as under : ­ "10........the lease deed Ex. P1 dated 19th May, 1978 executed both by the appellant and the respondent i.e. the landlady and the tenant, Rai Chand Jain, though unregistered can be considered for collateral purposes and as such the findings of the Appellate Authority to the effect that the said deed cannot be used for collateral purposes namely to show that the purpose was to lease out the demised premises for residential purposes of the tenant only is not at all legally correct. It is well settled that unregistered lease executed by both the parties can be looked into for collateral purposes. In the instant case the purpose of the lease is evident from the deed itself which is as follows: "The lessor hereby demises House No. 382, Sector 30­A, Chandigarh, to lessee for residential purposes only".
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 85 - B C Ray - Full Document

Bajaj Auto Limited vs Behari Lal Kohli on 8 August, 1989

In the case of Bajaj Auto Limited vs. Behari Lal Kohli [AIR 1989 SC 1806] , this Court observed that if a document is inadmissible for non­registration, all its terms are inadmissible including the one dealing with landlord's permission to his tenant to sub­let. It was also held in that decision that if a decree purporting to create a lease is inadmissible in evidence for want of registration, none of the terms of the lease can be admitted in evidence and that to use a document for the purpose of proving an important clause in the lease is not using it as a collateral purpose.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 91 - L M Sharma - Full Document
1   2 Next