Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.19 seconds)Bhaiya Punjalal Bhagwanddin vs Dave Bhagwatprasad Prabhuprasad on 4 May, 1962
Any how, in Bhaiya Punjalal Bhagwanddin v. Dave Bhagwatprasad P. it has been said that the word 'may' in sub-section has the meaning of 'shall'.
Mrs. Manorama S. Masurekar vs Mrs. Dhanlaxmi G. Shah And Anr on 23 August, 1966
This position has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of Ms. Manorama Section Masurekar v. Mrs. Dhanlaxmi G. Shah .
Jayantilal Kalabhai Mehta vs Ratilal Gulabdas Mehta on 3 May, 1976
This position has been well settled by the decision of this Court in Jayantilal Kalabhai Mehta v. Ratilal Gulabdas Mehta (1977) XVIII GLR 374. This principle, any how, has no application to the instant case as the contention coming from the learned Counsel cannot be accepted on the facts stated in the notice. Because of this reason, the first contention coming from learned Counsel Mr. Desai that the notice is not a legal and valid one, cannot be accepted.
Section 22 in The Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Section 23 in The Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
The Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947
The Gujarat University Act, 1949
Jaywant S. Kulkarni & Ors vs Minochar Dosabhai Shroff & Ors on 9 August, 1988
4. A comparative recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Jaywant S. Kulkarni v. Minochar Dosabhai Shroff and reiterates the principle adopted by a catena of previous decisions that, where the rent is payable by the month and there is no dispute regarding the amount of the standard rent or permitted increases, and if such rent or increases are in arrears for a period of six months or more and the tenant neglects to make the payment thereof until the expiration of the period of the one month after the notice referred to Sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Act, the Court shall pass a decree for eviction in the suit. Thus, it is clear that, if the case falls within the purview of Section 12(3)(a) of the Act, the Court has to pass a decree of eviction. It is, indeed, true that the Gujarat Act uses the word 'may' in Section 12(3)(a) of the Act, while the Maharashtra Act uses the word 'shall' instead of the said word 'may'.