Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 44 (1.06 seconds)

Natraj Studios (P) Ltd vs Navrang Studios & Anr on 7 January, 1981

The learned counsel for the appellant, however, argued that the provisions of the Delhi Rent Act, 1995 are not applicable to the premises by virtue of Section 3(1)(c) of the Act and hence, the law laid down in the aforementioned two cases [Booz Allen & Hamilton Inc. v. SBI Home Finance Ltd., (2011) 5 SCC 532 : (2011) 2 SCC (Civ) 781] , [Natraj Studios (P) Ltd. v. Navrang Studios, (1981) 1 SCC 523] would not apply. We do not agree.
Supreme Court of India Cites 30 - Cited by 183 - O C Reddy - Full Document

Booz-Allen & Hamilton Inc vs Sbi Home Finance Ltd. & Ors on 15 April, 2011

The learned counsel for the appellant, however, argued that the provisions of the Delhi Rent Act, 1995 are not applicable to the premises by virtue of Section 3(1)(c) of the Act and hence, the law laid down in the aforementioned two cases [Booz Allen & Hamilton Inc. v. SBI Home Finance Ltd., (2011) 5 SCC 532 : (2011) 2 SCC (Civ) 781] , [Natraj Studios (P) Ltd. v. Navrang Studios, (1981) 1 SCC 523] would not apply. We do not agree.
Supreme Court of India Cites 23 - Cited by 537 - R V Raveendran - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 Next