Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 32 (0.38 seconds)
Jabal vs O.L.Of on 17 October, 2008 cites

Laxmidas Bapudas Darbar And Anr vs Smt. Rudravva And Others on 27 August, 2001

In view of the above finding, all the arguments made by Mr Parikh, learned advocate for the appellant- landlords fall to the ground and, therefore, it is not necessary to deal with a number of authorities cited by him which are inconsistent with the law laid down by the Three Judge Bench in Laxmidas Darbar's case (which judgment was rendered after considering the Seven Judge Bench decision in Dhanapal Chettiar's case). This discussion is also sufficient to hold that when rights of the lessee under the lease deed cannot be curtailed by the provisions of the Bombay Rent Act during subsistence of the lease period, the other arguments about applicability of Sections 15, 18 and 19 can also not be accepted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 22 - B Kumar - Full Document

V. Dhanapal Chettiar vs Yesodai Ammal on 23 August, 1979

In view of the above finding, all the arguments made by Mr Parikh, learned advocate for the appellant- landlords fall to the ground and, therefore, it is not necessary to deal with a number of authorities cited by him which are inconsistent with the law laid down by the Three Judge Bench in Laxmidas Darbar's case (which judgment was rendered after considering the Seven Judge Bench decision in Dhanapal Chettiar's case). This discussion is also sufficient to hold that when rights of the lessee under the lease deed cannot be curtailed by the provisions of the Bombay Rent Act during subsistence of the lease period, the other arguments about applicability of Sections 15, 18 and 19 can also not be accepted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 48 - Cited by 361 - N L Untwalia - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next