Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 26 (0.32 seconds)Section 25B in The Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 [Entire Act]
Section 116 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
M/S A.K. Woolen Industries & Ors vs Shri Narain Gupta on 31 October, 2017
In this
regard, learned counsel for petitioner has relied upon judgment of
Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case titled "M/s A. K. Woolen Industries &
Ors vs. Shri Narain Gupta", Delhi High Court decided on 31.10.2017
wherein it was held that:
Satyawati Sharma (Dead) By Lrs vs Union Of India & Another on 16 April, 2008
It is observed that the scope of Sec. 14(1)(e) of the Act has been
enlarged in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court titled as
"Satyawati Sharma v. Union of India" AIR 2008 SC 3148 so as to
include premises let out for commercial purposes within the ambit of a
petition under section 14(1)(e) of the Act.
Shri Nem Chand Daga vs Shri Inder Mohan Singh Rana on 7 September, 2001
In the judgment titled as "Nem Chand Daga v. Inder Mohan
Singh Rana" reported as 94 (2001) DLT 683, the Hon'ble High Court
of Delhi held:
Sarwan Dass Bange vs Ram Prakash on 29 January, 2010
Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case titled "Sarwan Dass Bange
Vs. Ram Prakash" 167 (2010) DLT 80, while referring to "Baldev
Singh Bajwa v. Monish Saini" (2005) 12 SCC 778 held as under:
Baldev Singh Bajwa vs Monish Saini on 5 October, 2005
Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case titled "Sarwan Dass Bange
Vs. Ram Prakash" 167 (2010) DLT 80, while referring to "Baldev
Singh Bajwa v. Monish Saini" (2005) 12 SCC 778 held as under:
Sushil Kanta Chakravarty vs Rajeshwar Kumar on 24 March, 1999
In this
scenario, following observations of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in "Sushil
Kanta Chakarvarty Vs. Rajeshwar Kumar", 79 (1999) DLT 210 are
significant to be quoted:
Meenakshi vs Ramesh Khanna And Anr. on 16 May, 1995
Further, the observations of this Court are fortified by the
observations of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in "Meenakshi Vs. Ramesh
Khanna & Anr. 60(1995) DLT 524: