Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.22 seconds)Section 25 in The Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 [Entire Act]
The Delhi Shops and Establishments Act, 1954
Section 14 in The Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 [Entire Act]
Section 116 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Sheela & Ors vs Firm Prahlad Rai Prem Prakash on 4 March, 2002
In Sheela & Ors. Vs. Prahlad
Rai Prem Prakash, AIR 2002 SC 1264, it was held that in a
landlord tenant dispute, the owner is one who has better rights
then that of the tenant and it is not incumbent upon the
E53/11 Page 9/14
petitioner to prove beyond shadow of doubt that he is the owner
of the property. The meaning of the word 'owner' visavis
tenant is that ownership is something more than a tenant. The
respondent has not stated as to who else is a owner if the
petitioner is not the owner of the tenanted premises. Hence, the
bald denial of the ownership of the petitioner by the respondent
is without any merits. Even otherwise, Section 116 of Indian
Evidence Act estops the tenant of immovable property from
denying the title of his landlord so long as he remains in
possession. Hence, the defence raised by the respondent is
rejected being without any merits.
Section 25B in The Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 [Entire Act]
Niranjan Lal Ram Chandra vs Ram Swarup Bhagwan Singh And Anr. on 29 March, 1950
At present, the petitioner is having 13 family members and only
four rooms are available for her and her entire family members
and the petitioner is presently living in open space/ baramda.
The petitioner and her family members are not having any other
property except the abovesaid property where she is presently
residing with her family members. The petitioner requires the
tenanted premises for her own bonafide requirement for
residential purposes and the petitioner is no more interested to
keep the respondent as tenant in the suit property. It has further
been submitted that the husband of the petitioner had filed the
eviction petition u/S. 14(1)(c) and (e) of the DRC Act against
the respondent titled as Ram Azor Vs. Bhagwan Singh vide
petition no. E249/09 in the Court of Sh. Parveen Singh, the
then Ld. ARC (NE), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi but after the
death of her husband, the petitioner herein had withdrawn the
abovesaid petition on 01.04.2011. A prayer has been made for
passing eviction order in respect of the tenanted room/ shop.
1