Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.32 seconds)Section 2 in The Delhi Rent Act, 1995 [Entire Act]
Section 14 in The Delhi Rent Act, 1995 [Entire Act]
Section 19 in The Slum Areas (Improvement And Clearance) Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 11 in The Court-fees Act, 1870 [Entire Act]
Shri Chiraguddin vs Smt. Urmila Rani & Ors. on 11 September, 2014
(a) of DRC Act, the tenancy of the late father of the defendants had not
terminated and since thereafter, till date, plaintiff has not given any notice for
termination of tenancy as provided under Section 106 of TPA and
consequently, the tenancy had continued and the defendants being the class I
legal heirs of the original tenant have inherited the said tenancy. The counsel
for defendants had also placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble High
Court of Delhi titled as 'Chiraguddin Vs. Urmila Rani dated 11.09.2014'.
Dina Nath (D) By Lrs. & Anr vs Subhash Chand Saini & Ors on 16 April, 2014
In this regard, reliance is placed on the judgments of Hon'ble High
Court of Delhi titled as 'Kishori Lal (D) through Lrs Vs. Siri Krishan 1996
(1) RCR 572' , 'Krishna Prakash Vs. Dilip Harel Mitra 2001 (2) RCR 364',
and 'Mukesh Kumar (D) through Lrs Vs. Saini Cooperative Thrift &
Credit Ltd 156 (2009), DLT 550'. Accordingly, it is contended that
defendants have not inherited the tenancy in the suit property in any manner
and plaintiff is not required to approach the Rent Controller for eviction of
defendants and suit is duly maintainable before the present court.
Bipin Behari Tawakley vs Kishori Lal Mehra And Ors. on 23 January, 1981
15. The legal position in this regard has been further enunciated by Hon'ble
High Court of Delhi in clear terms in the judgment of 'Kishori Lal (supra)',
wherein the reference was also made to the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court
titled as 'JC Chhatterji & Ors Vs. Shri Shri Kishan Tondon & Anr 1972
RCR 675 As well as another judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi titled as
' Bipin Bihari Vs. Kishori Lal 1981 (1) RLR 241' and it was held as follows:
" That if a tenant leaves behind a widow who was ordinarily resides
with him at the time of is death, she alone will get the right to inherit
the statutory tenancy to the exclusion of all other heirs and that too for
her own lifetime only. That this right does not pass on to any other heir
or legal representative of the deceased tenant......the sons or daughters
or any other category of heirs of deceased tenant do not get any right of
inheritance so far as the statutory tenancy of the deceased tenant is
concerned."
M/S Nopany Investments (P) Ltd vs Santokh Singh (Huf) on 10 December, 2007
21. It is further pertinent to mention that even otherwise, law is very well
settled that mere filing of the suit amounts to termination of tenancy and in this
regard, reliance can be placed upon the judgment of ' Nopani Investment (P)
Ltd. Vs. Santokh Singh (HUF) (2008) 2 SCC 728.
Vinod Khanna And Ors. vs Bakshi Sachdev on 20 April, 1995
In this regard, I also seek reliance from the authority of
Hon'ble High Court of Delhi titled as "Vinod Khanna & Ors. vs. Bakshi
Sachdev (deceased) through LRs & Ors." AIR 1996 (Delhi) 32, wherein it
Civil Suit No: 9482/16 (Vivek Kumar Agarwal)
CJ03/SHD,KKDDelhi
17
Ajay Kumar Vs. Ashwani Sharma
was observed that the judicial notice can be taken of the fact about increase of
rents in the premises in and around Delhi, which is a city of growing importance
being the capital of the country, which is a matter of public history.