Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.82 seconds)
Abraham Roy vs Philip @ Pappachan on 18 March, 2009 cites

Jivram Ranchhoddas Thakkar And Anr. vs Tulshiram Ratanchand Mantri And Ors. on 17 March, 1977

15. Yet another suggestion of Mr.Muraleedharan was that a humanistic approach should be adopted by us and the landlord should be directed to separate the stair case portion of the petition schedule room from the portion actually occupied by the tenant for doing lottery business by constructing a wall between the two and by installing RCR. N0. 251/08 -24- separate rolling shutters for these two portions. We do notice that the Supreme Court has in Jivram v. Tulsiram (1977)3 SCC 517 directed the adoption of a humanistic approach for the implementation of the policy of live and let live. It is doubtful whether as the statutory revisional authority under section 20 of Act 2 of 1965 this court has the power to issue such a direction which is completely beyond the pleadings on which the rent control petition went for trial. Moreover, in the light of the proven facts that the schedule building inclusive of the area occupied by the stair case has a carpet area of 100 sq. ft. only and the landlord is in need of the room not only for the purpose of easier access to the upper floors so that construction of those floors can be accelerated but also for setting up a reception-cum-office area, there is no scope for any direction to the parties to share the room equally or unequally.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 12 - V R Iyer - Full Document

Madan Lal And Anr. vs Smt. Bhupinder Kaur And Ors. on 7 March, 2003

At the most, it can be stated that there was some compulsion on the part of the landlord to the tenant to vacate the premises immediately. Exertion of such compulsion by a landlord on the tenant for procuring early eviction in our opinion cannot be a circumstance indicative of absence of genuineness in the need projected by the landlord. On the contrary the circumstance that the landlord had been compelling the tenant to vacate the building immediately, in a given case can be indicative of the genuineness and urgency of the landlord's need. We in this context will notice that a learned Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court had occasion to observe as follows in his judgment in Madan Lal v. Smt.Gurbachan Kaur, 1981 (1) R.C.J. 640.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 3 - S S Nijjar - Full Document
1