Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.22 seconds)Karnataka Rent Act, 1999
The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882
Section 115 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
V. Dhanapal Chettiar vs Yesodai Ammal on 23 August, 1979
14. Therefore, the contention that the principles of Section 108(d) of the Transfer of Property Act cannot be imported into the provisions of the Karnataka Rent Control Act does not merit consideration. V. Dhana-pal Chettiar's case, supra, relied by the learned Counsel supports the principle that Section 108(d) of the Transfer of Property Act applies as shown above rather than advancing the case of petitioner.
Section 3 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Section 108 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Section 50 in Karnataka Rent Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001
Om Prakash vs Amar Singh & Anr on 9 January, 1987
18. However, the contention of Shri S. Shekar Shetty is that the "permanent structure" envisaged under Section 21(1)(c) should be of such a nature that it should transform the character of the building or change the structure otherwise. Merely putting up any structure without changing the original character or structure of the building will not
amount to "erecting a permanent structure" within the meaning of Section 21(1)(c) of the Act. The language of Section 21(1)(c) of the Act does not admit of such a construction. Reliance placed by the learned Counsels in Om Prakash's case, supra and G. Arunachalam's case, supra, are wholly misplaced. Those two cases were dealing with the provisions of Section 14(c) of the Uttar Pradesh Contonments (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act (10 of 1952). The said section reads as under.--