Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1989Raj24; 1988(2)WLN197
..... of shri mehta that the said order is nullity and should, therefore, be ignored. merely because the executing court has wrongly applied the provisions of section 20 of the delhi and ajmer rent control act, 1952 which stood repealed and were not applicable, does not mean that the order passed by the executing court was a nullity. the executing court had the ..... of the munsiff.12. shri mehta has submitted that the munsiff was not right in holding that the appellant had become a direct tenant, under section 20 of the delhi and ajmer rent control act, 1952, since the provisions of the said act had been repealed prior to the passing of the decree dated 20th august, 1965 and that the said ..... sub-tenant of the plaintiff in the suit premises had become the direct tenant of the same under shri n. n. tandon in view of section 20 of the delhi and ajmer rent control act, 1952 and that the said order passed by the executing court on the application under order 21, rule 97, c.p.c. was not challenged, either .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2008(1)Raj192
..... and the rights of the landlord.32. karam singh sobti v. sri pratap chand reported in : [1964]4scr647 , while interpreting the provisions of the delhi & ajmer rent control act, 1952 and delhi rent act 1958, the majority view was that the term 'shall have regard to the provisions of this act' means the court shall have regard to the ..... the non obstante clause under section 57 of the control act of 1958 while repealing the delhi and ajmer rent control act, 1952 was as follows:57(1) the delhi and ajmer rent control act, 1952, in so far as it is applicable to the union territory of delhi, is hereby repealed.(2) notwithstanding such repeal, all suits and other proceedings under the ..... attitude.11. in d.c. bhatia v. union of india reported in : (1995)1scc104 while discussing the report of the national urbanization and the objects of the delhi rent control act of 1958, the hon'ble supreme court observed as under:28. in order to strike a balance between the interests of the landlords and also the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1974WLN199
..... behalf of the appellants is that the learned additional civil judge has erred in coming to the conclusion that by virtue of the provisions of section 20 of the delhi and ajmer rent control act, 1952 suryanand became a tenant of the plaintiffs and since he had not incurred any liability to be ejected no decree for ejectment could be passed ..... against him.6. it may be pointed out here that the delhi and ajmer rent control act, 1952 was repealed on 27.11.1957. the court below has by placing reliance on an agreement executed between suryanand & the plaintiff aditya prakash dated 21 ..... that the tenancy of ramji das in respect of the ground floor came to an end on 21-9-1957 and that by virtue of section 20 of the delhi and ajmer rent control act, 1952 (which will hereinafter be called the act of 1952) suryanand became directly a tenant of the landlord aditya prakash.7. i have carefully examined .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2004(2)Raj819; 2003(4)WLC790
..... tenant was empowered to sub- let the suit property. the appellant was sub-tenant. the landlord filed civil suit for eviction as the head tenant failed to pay rent. under section 20 of the delhi & ajmer rent control act, 1952, the tenant was empowered to sub-let the suit property. the suit of the landlord was decreed and in execution proceedings the high court ..... this stage, we must pay due regard to section 57 of the 1958 act. that says: '57. repeal and savings.- (1) the delhi & ajmer rent control act, 1952 (38 of 1952), insofar as it is applicable to the union territory of delhi, is hereby repealed. (2) notwithstanding such repeal, all suits and other proceedings under the said act pending, at the commencement of this .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1997(3)WLC501; 1997(2)WLN15
..... point canvassed before me.33. in case of dr. gopal doss verma (supra) interpretation of section 13 (1) (e) and section 13 (1) (h) of the delhi and ajmer rent control act, 1952 came up for consideration before the apex court wherein in paragraph 9 it was ruled that it would be unreasonable to hold that the tenancy which was ..... years time for vacating the premises.43. in case of keshav kumar swamp (supra) the land lord filed an application under section 14(1)(e) of delhi rent control act, 1958 before rent controller seeking eviction of the tenant from the premises in question on the ground of bonafide requirement. the tenant (company) opposed the suit of eviction on the ..... .36. in case of s. kartar singh (supra) the apex court while interpreting old section 131(1) (h) corresponding to new section 14(1)(h) of delhi rent control act held that where the premises had been let out to the predecessor in interest of the tenants not for residential purpose alone but also for business or professional .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1962Raj190
..... as the amending act of 1957), and published in the rajasthan. gazette extra ordinary part 4 (a) at page 157 of the same date. prior to this, the delhi and ajmer rent control act no. 38 of 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the act of 1952) was in force in the nasirabad cantonment area. this act was passed by the indian ..... a few facts which have culminated in this reference. the plaintiff nawal mal filed a suit against the defendant nathu lal for recovery of arrears of rent and ejectment in the court of the munsif, ajmer district, ajmer in the first instance, and thence, it was transferred to the court of the munsif, nasirabad, from whom this reference has emanated. the ..... parliament and was brought into force in the ajmer territory, in which the nasirabad cantonment area is included, on the 9th of june, 1952.when the case, came up .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1980WLN472
..... or payment of fine or in default or furnishing security9. it will be seen from the above conspectus of the, relevant provisions of the act that in areas like ajmer in which the act is in force the children's court has exclusive jurisdiction to deal with all proceedings under the act relating to delinquent childern. if a child, ..... rajasthan children act, 1970 (hereafter called the act) he, however, further held that though they were children, they could still be tried by the court of sessions at ajmer under sections 302 and 364, i.p.c. in view of the provisions of section 27 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 (hereafter called the new code) the ..... they had actually murdered him. on investigation, the police submitted a charge-sheet against mahavir singh and sumer singh in the court of judicial magistrate 1st class no. 4, ajmer, on april 22, 1978, praying for proceedings against them for their trial under sections 302 and 364, i.p.c. the case against the third accused namely, prem singh .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1989(2)WLN448
..... authority, namely, the district magistrate, ajmer . in the grounds of detention, annexure-3, grounds nos. 22, 23 & 24 relate to the cases under the arms act and under section 307/149 etc of the ..... offences under section 307/149 etc. of the penal code when the impugned order of detention under the act was served on him he was in central jail, ajmer as an under trial prisoner curiously enough, this fact of the petitioner being under detention as an under trial prisoner did not come to the knowledge of the detaining ..... detention is challenged on the following grounds:(1) the detenu was already in custody on 18-2-1989 when the detention order was served on him in central jail, ajmer. this fact was not taken into consideration by the district magistrate, so much so that these facts his of already being under arrest in custody were not mentioned in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1971Raj306; 1970(3)WLN758
..... difference in the phraseology used in the delhi rent control act 59 of 1958 does not appear to have been noticed in the judgments cited at the bar in support ..... singh, air 1959 punj 508. but both these cases were decided on the interpretation of sections 8 to 11 of the delhi and ajmer rent control act 38 of 1952 in which it was expressly provided that the standard rent shall be fixed on an application made to the court for that purpose or in an application in any suit or in any ..... proceeding. we need express no opinion on the question whether the cases under the delhi and ajmer rent control act 38 of 1952 were correctly decided. but the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : RLW2009(1)Raj62
..... at the rate of rs. 400/- per month during the period of posting on such transfer (not being request transfer, nor posting on promotion). besides, house rent allowance and/or city compensatory allowance, which the employee was drawing before such transfer, shall be protected during the period of transfer.(2) notwithstanding anything contained in subparagraph ..... particular manner and subdelegation was excluded either expressly or by necessary implication. in the case of ganpati singhji v. state of ajmer and anr. air 1955 sc 188, section 40 of the ajmer laws regulations of 1877 empowered the chief commissioner to make rules, inter alia, for maintenance of watch and ward, and for ..... the concerned secretary brought out chances of amicable solution, he withdrew the suit and was permitted to remain at delhi, was put on deputation for one year, and was directed to join i.i.t., delhi. the appellant though joined but was not satisfied and again approached the civil court seeking declaration that the .....
Tag this Judgment!