Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.26 seconds)

B. Balaiah vs Chandoor Lachaiah on 18 January, 1965

By doubting the soundness of the decision of the Division Bench in Balaiah v. Lachaiah at this stage, scope will be given to unsettle the rights of the several parties settled earlier. In this view, I am not inclined to refer this case to another Division Bench. As already stated, the finding recorded by the lower appellate authority that, the demised premises is bona fide required by the respondent for carrying on a new business of his own, is a pure finding of fact reached on a critical appraisal of the evidence adduced by both the parties and does not, therefore call for interference.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 11 - Cited by 26 - Full Document

Easwaran Chettiar vs K. Subbarayan on 3 April, 1970

In support of the contention advanced on behalf of the petitioner, reliance is placed upon the decision of a Division Bench of the Madras High Court in L. Chettiar v. K. Subarayan, wherein, construing Section 7 (3) (A) (iii) of the Madras Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960 - which is in pari materia with S. 10 (3) (a) (iii) of the Act - it was held that the landlord who was occupying a non-residential building of his own in the occupation of the tenant.
Madras High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 14 - Full Document
1