Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 40 (0.31 seconds)Ram Kishan & Sons vs Mohd Haroon Japanwala & Ors on 6 March, 2012
- Leave to defend filed beyond the statutory period of 15 days, rightly dismissed.
(G) Ram Kishan & Sons vs. Mohd. Haroon Japanwala & Ors. 188 (2012)
DLT 364 - service of summons upon employee of tenant valid service and
application seeking leave to contest filed beyond 15 days not maintainable.
Mohan Lal vs Tirath Ram Chopra And Anr. on 14 May, 1982
(H)
Ramesh Tuli vs. Sharda Kapoor 153 (2008) DLT 302 Rent Controller cannot
condone the delay in filing application for leave to contest (I) Mohan Lal vs.
Thirath Ram Chopra & Ors. 1982 (2) AIRCJ 162 - on bonafide requirement.
Vinod Kumar Verma vs Manmohan Verma & Anr on 19 August, 2008
(L) Vinod Kumar Verma
vs. Manmohan Verma & Anr. 148(2008) DLT 580 Ownership under the Act is
not absolute ownership.
Shantaram Laxmanrao Kekre vs Shyam Sundar And Anr. on 1 April, 1971
(M) Amarjit Singh vs. Mrs. Khatoon Quamarain
23(1983) DLT 362 On bonafide requirement (N) Shantaram vs. Shyam
Sunder & Anr. 1972 AIRCJ 741 - Even if one landlord, out of many landlords,
establishes bonafide requirement, eviction should follow.
Freddy Fernandes vs P.L. Mehra on 3 January, 1973
(O) Freddy Fernandes
vs. P. L. Mehra 1973 RCR 53 - It is for the landlord himself to judge his own
needs and his desire to seek economic gain is legitimate.
Royal Nepal Airlines Corporation vs Shrishti Properties Pvt Ltd on 2 November, 2011
(P) Royal Nepal
Airlines Corporation vs. Shrishti Properties Pvt. Ltd. 184 (2011) DLT 362 -
In the absence of tenant disclosing prima facie case, eviction should follow.
Pushkar Singh vs Ansuiya on 22 August, 2006
(R) Pushkar Singh vs. Ansuiya
(2006)6 SCC 799 - Alternative accommodation not suitable, eviction ordered.
Smt. Viran Wali vs Sh. Kuldeep Rai Kochhar on 12 November, 2010
In Viran Wali (supra) while affirming the decision
to decline leave to contest, it was observed, "It is well known fact that any shop
situated on the ground floor is more convenient than a shop situated in the
basement of the premises." The case at hand stands on a better footing inasmuch
as ground floor shop, in any case, would be commercially more viable than shop
on second floor.
Budh Singh & Sons & Ors vs Sangeeta Kedia on 17 November, 2011
(U) Budh Singh & Sons & Ors. vs. Sangeeta
Kedia 185(2011) DLT 580 - On bonafide requirement (V) Labhu Lal vs.
Sandhya Gupta 173 (2010) DLT 318 - On bonafide requirement (W) Ram Babu
Agarwal vs. Jay Kishan Das VII (2009) SLT 492 - Tenant can be evicted if
landlord wants to start his own business, even if it is in field in which he has no
experience. (X) C. Natarajan & Anr. G. N. Shanmugam & Ors. 2007 (1) RCR
252 - On bonafide requirement.