Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 18 (8.33 seconds)Section 2 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
The Punjab Tenancy Rules
Section 11 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Section 5 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Bengal Tenancy Act, 1885
The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882
Arumugha Gounder vs Ardhanari Mudaliar And Ors. on 4 November, 1974
Similarly as observed in Arumugha Gounder's case any
such act of the Receiver done on behalf of the Court pen-
dente lite and anyone who gets possession through such an
act could only do so subject to the directions and orders of
the Court. If we apply the above principles to the case of
Tatas the tenancy created in their favour by the Receiver is
in violation and contrary to the injunction order and such
an act is subject to the directions and orders of the Court
appointing the Receiver. Therefore the tenancy created in
favour of the Tatas was in breach of the order of the court
and consequently the Tatas cannot claim any protection under
the provisions of the Act and they are liable to be evicted.
In the counter affidavit filed on their behalf, it is
no doubt stated that they were inducted into possession and
even sending the cheques. The case of the appellant is that
cheques were never encashed. In any event as observed above,
the new tenancy created in their favour contrary to the
orders of the Court does not create a fight and is liable to
be cancelled. Consequently the provisions of the Act cannot
be invoked by them. The appeal is therefore dismissed as
against respondent No. 1 Grindlays and allowed as against
respondent No. 2 Tatas. In the circumstances of the case,
parties are directed to bear their own costs.
Biswabani (P.) Ltd vs Santosh Kumar Dutta And Ors on 14 September, 1979
In Biswabani (P) Ltd. v. Santosh Kumar Dutta and Ors.,
[1980] 1 SCR 650 it is observed that:
Damadilal And Others vs Parashram And Others on 7 May, 1976
In Darnadilal and Others v. Parashram and Others, [1976]
Suppl. SCR 645 Section 2(i) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommoda-
tion Control Act, 1961 which is analogous to Section 2(h) of
the Act has been considered and it is held: