Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (3.71 seconds)Bai Chanchal & Ors vs Syed Jalaluddin & Ors on 11 September, 1970
In Bai Chanchal and others v. Syed Jalaluddin and others, 1970 Vol. 2 Rent Control Reporter 915, it was urged before the apex Court that pleadings indicated that the land had been let out for making structures and the structures could only be utilised by being let out on rent. Such purpose would constitute business or trade. The apex Court observed that it was unable to see any jurisdiction for such an inference. The mere fact that there was a mention that structures that may be erected would be removed could in no way lead to a conclusion that the principal purpose of the lease was to use the land for business or trade.
Section 13 in East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 [Entire Act]
The Delhi Rent Act, 1995
Dhian Chand And Anr. vs Parkash Kaur And Ors. on 18 August, 1977
In Gian Chand v. Parkash Chand and others, (1984)86 P.L.R. 275, it was held by this Court that where the land was let out with a discretion to the tenant that he could use it for any purpose and he constructed rooms and varandah on the land and started running a Karyana business in the same, the land could not be said to have been let out for being used principally for business or trade and would not fall with in the definition of 'rented land. The aforesaid authorities with which we concur are an answer to the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant.
1