Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.55 seconds)
Sh. Ashok Kumar Bhatnagar vs Sushila Devi Gulati on 13 July, 2012 cites

M/S.Sait Nagjee Purushotham & Co.Ltd vs Vimalabai Prabhulal & Ors on 4 October, 2005

It has been held in Sait Nagjee Purushotham and Company Ltd. Vs. Vimalabai Prabhulal and others, 2005 8 SCC 252 by the Hon'ble Apex Court that, "It is not tenant who can dictate terms to landlord and advice him what he should do and what he Eviction Petition No. E­122/10 Page 17 of 22 should not­It is always the privilege of landlord to choose the nature and place of business."
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 342 - A K Mathur - Full Document

Smt. Sudesh Kumari Soni & Anr. vs Smt. Prabha Khanna & Anr. on 3 October, 2008

34. It is a common knowledge that the ground floor is more suitable and convenient for the purpose of running a clinic in terms of attending the patients as well as in providing medical facilities in urgent and emergent situations. Therefore, the upper floors cannot be said to be suitable and convenient for running the clinic by the petitioner and his son, more so in view of the fact that upper floors are being used by the petitioner and his family for residential purposes. It has been held in Sudesh Kumar Soni & Anr. Vs. Prabha Khanna & Anr., 153 (2008) DLT 652 that, "It is not for tenant to dictate terms to landlord as to how else he can adjust himself without getting possession of tenanted premises - suitability has to be seen for convenience of landlord and his family members and on the basis of circumstances including their profession, vocation, style of living, habit and background." It is also a settled law that landlord is the master of his choice and tenant cannot suggest the landlord how he should use the space available with him.
Delhi High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 264 - M Singh - Full Document
1