Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.21 seconds)Section 109 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Section 250 in The Companies Act, 2013 [Entire Act]
Section 248 in The Companies Act, 2013 [Entire Act]
Milk Food Ltd. vs Kiran Khanna on 4 May, 1993
25. Since more than twelve years have elapsed after appellant no.1 was
asked to attorn to respondents No.1
.1 to 5, learned Single Judge in the
impugned order correctly relying upon the decision passed in Milk Food vs
Kiran Khanna; 51 (1993) DLT 141 held that irrespective of any deficiency
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:JASWANT
SINGH RAWAT RFA(OS) 84/2013 Page 12 of 16
Signing Date:17.08.2023
18:21:09
in title of the person claiming to be the landlord, it is not open to th
the tenant
to deny the relationship. Consequently, this Court is in agreement with the
finding of the learned Single Judge that the question of title is irrelevant and
need not be adjudicated.
The Companies Act, 2013
Section 106 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Ambica Prasad vs Md. Alam And Anr on 8 April, 2015
23. It is pertinent to note here that Supreme Court in the case of Ambica
Prasad Vs. Mohd. Alam and Another, (2015) 13 SCC 13 has held that the
definition of landlord includes not only the owner but also any person
receiving rent, whether on his own account or for the benefit of any other
person or as a trustee, guardian, or receiver for any other person. Thus, it has
been held as follows:
State Of A.P. & Ors vs D. Raghukul Pershad (D) By Lrs & Ors on 8 August, 2012
7. It is significant that in a suit between a landlord and tenant,
as the present suit professes to be, the question of title is
irrelevant and not to be adjudicated. Reliance in this regard can
be placed on Sri Ram Pasricha Vs. Jagqnnath AIR 1976 SC
2335, State
ate of A.P. Vs. D. Raghukul Parshad (2012) 8 SCC 584
and Jai Bhawan Mittal Vs. Meena Join MANU/DE/0587/2013
MANU/DE/0587/2013".