Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.33 seconds)
Rajiv Chugh vs Gurpal Singh & Others on 12 March, 2012 cites

Baldev Singh Bajwa vs Monish Saini on 5 October, 2005

15. The question of bonafides had been considered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Baldev Singh Bajwa's case (supra) and has been held that if the landlord does not use the property for which it was being got vacated, he would be liable to be proceeded against under Section 19(2-B) and also liable to be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months or a fine which may extent to Rs.1000/- or both. Similarly a safeguard has also been provided in Section 13-B(3) which gives the tenant a right to file an application for restoration of possession if the owner transfers or lets out the property within five years from taking possession.
Supreme Court of India Cites 21 - Cited by 484 - P P Naolekar - Full Document

Kundan Singh vs Lal Singh on 2 August, 2004

The judgments referred to by the counsel for the petitioner in Kundan Singh (supra) pertains to a case where the Rent Controller, Chandigarh had granted leave as there were issues regarding the partition on the basis of which the NRI landlord was seeking eviction, and accordingly, it was held that it would give rise to a triable issue and the petition of the landlord challenging the leave was dismissed by this Court. In the present case, there is a letter of allotment in favour of the landlord himself, and therefore, the status of being a NRI and a owner of the property is not in question.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 12 - Full Document

M/S. India Umbrella Manufacturing Co. & ... vs Bhagabandei Agarwalla (Dead) By ... on 5 January, 2004

"Following the ratio of Mohinder Prasad Jain's case and India Umbrella Manufacturing Co's case (supra), when a petition is filed by the landlord for eviction in the capacity as a co-owner, in agreement with the other co-owners, the same cannot be termed as not maintainable. In the present case, the petitioner has produced enough material to indicate that he is a co-owner of the property pursuant to the decree of the civil court dated 5.10.1978. The name of the petitioner has already been included in the Municipal record as a co-owner. Thus, the observation of the learned Rent Controller that the dispute regarding relationship of landlord and tenant has to be decided by adducing evidence is contrary to the principle of law. In view of the ratio of the ruling in Mohinder Prasad jain's case (supra) a NRI who is a co-owner of the tenanted premises is entitled to file a petition Under Section 13-B of the Act."
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 321 - R C Lahoti - Full Document

Ravinder Paul Mohindra vs Gurbachan Singh And Ors. on 31 May, 2006

12. That on the issue of let out, it was argued that Section 13-B talks about the letting out and in the present case letting out was not by the landlord no.2 but was by a registered deed by Gurpal Singh, who was landlord no.1 and what was stated in the lease deed was that he was sole owner and there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and it was a triable issue. This question again has been answered in the judgment of Ravinder Pal Mohindra's case (supra) and it has been held as under:-
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 6 - M M Bedi - Full Document
1