Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.19 seconds)
Ashok Kumar Gupta (Dead ) Through Lrs vs Smt. Gauri Bagchi 32 Cont/1196/2019 ... on 28 February, 2020 cites

Sheela & Ors vs Firm Prahlad Rai Prem Prakash on 4 March, 2002

20. In the written statement filed by the defendant, he has not once disputed the sale deed executed by Shanti Bai in favour of plaintiff and his wife Neelam Gupta and since, the defendant has not disputed the execution of the sale deed, it was not necessary for the plaintiff to examine the witness to prove the same. As such, it is uncontroverted evidence on record that plaintiff is the owner of Khasra No. 7848/1 on which the suit shop is constructed and therefore, plaintiff has proved his ownership for the purpose of Section 12(1)(f) of the Act of 1961 as held by the Supreme Court in Sheela (supra). Similarly, the trial Court has rightly recorded a finding that defendant is the tenant of plaintiff. The said finding is a correct finding which could not have lightly interfered with by the first appellate Court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 216 - R C Lahoti - Full Document

Dilbagrai Punjabi vs Sharad Chandra on 8 August, 1988

In Dilbagrai Punjabi v. Sharad Chandra (1988) Supp SCC 710, this Court held that it was essential to sustain a claim of eviction under S. 12(1)(f) of the Act to establish that the plaintiff was the owner of the premises. However, the Court upheld the ownership of the 9 landlord having been proved on the basis of an admission of the ownership of the plaintiff made by the defendant in reply to notice given before the institution of the suit and the recital of the name of the plaintiff as the owner of the property contained in the receipts issued by the landlord to the tenant over a period of time. Thus, the burden of proving ownership in a suit between landlord and tenant where the landlord­ tenant relationship is either admitted or proved is not so heavy as in a title suit and lesser quantum of proof may suffice than what would be needed in a suit based on title against a person setting up a contending title while disputing the title of the plaintiff. Nevertheless pleading and proving ownership, in the sense as it carries in Rent Control Law, is one of the ingredients of the ground under S. 12(1)(f) of the Act."
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 121 - L M Sharma - Full Document
1