Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-07-2019
..... kerala high court in issac nina (supra), we are of the view that sections 4, 6 and 9 of the delhi rent control act, 1958, dealing with determination and fixation of standard rent, which have not taken into account the huge difference between the cost ..... under rent control act before the rent controller followed by appeal before the rent control tribunal and revision before the high court. after these proceedings have ended they would be followed by proceedings under the public premises act, before the estate ..... rent control act by the various state legislatures, the legal relationship between the landlord and tenant was governed by the provisions of the transfer of property act. delhi rent control act provided protection to the tenants from drastic enhancement of rent by the landlord as well as eviction, except on certain specific grounds. the legislature by the amendment act no.57 of 1988 has partially repealed the section 3 (c) of the delhi rent w.p.(c) 516/2010 & connected matters page 52 of 66 control act. this is a case of express repeal. by amending act ..... delhi and ajmer-merwar rent control act, 1947 (19 of 1947) or the delhi and ajmer rent control act, 1952 (38 of 1952),- (i) if such rent per annum does not exceed twelve hundred rupees, the rent so fixed; or (ii) if such rent per annum exceeds twelve hundred rupees, the rent so fixed together with fifteen per cent. of such rent; (b) in any other case, the rent calculated on the basis of [(note: subs. by act 57 of 1988, sec .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-27-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.2428/2015 & CM APPLs. 4371/2015 & 12669/2016 Judgment reserved on 30 November, 2018 Judgment pronounced on 27 August, 2019 ........ Petitioners Through : Mr. S.N. Chaudhri and Ms. Shruti Chaudhri, TEK CHAND NARULA AND OTHERS versus Advocates. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ........ RESPONDENTS Through : Mr. Kamal Kant Jha, Mr. Krishna Kumar, and Mr. Siddharth Jha, Advs. for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. R.N. Vats, Standing Counsel & Mr.Akshat Gupta, Advocate for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.:1. The petitioners, who are the progeny of one Daulat Ram Narula, have preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution to assail, essentially, the misuse charges and damages for unauthorized construction sought to be levied by the respondents qua property described as 1/90, P Block, Connaught Circus, New Delhi (hereafter referred to as property). 1.1 Portions of the property were...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-23-2019
$~36 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:23. d August, 2019 + CM(M) 1229/2019 and CM Appl. 37697/2019 BHAGWAN DASS ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Deepak Sharma, Advocate (M:98689. 5967). versus USHA TYAGI ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral) CM Appl. 37698/2019 (exemption) 1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of. CM(M) 1229/2019 And CM Appl. 37697/2019 2. The present petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the District and Sessions Judge in an appeal under Section 38 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 wherein leave to amend the written statement by the... Petitioner-Tenant was rejected.3. The background is that a petition under Section 14D came to be filed by Smt. Usha Tyagi before the Rent Control Tribunal. The property in question is property bearing No.WZ-41, Basai Dara Pur New Delhi-110015. Ld. counsel submits that the... Petitioner herein was g...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Aug-05-2019
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3793 OF2016VINOD KUMAR APPELLANT(S) VERSUS ASHOK KUMAR GANDHI RESPONDENT(S) With C.A. No.8972-8973/2017, C.A.No.6063 of 2019(arising out of SLP(C) No.19965/2017), C.A.No.6064 of 2019 (arising out of SLP(C) No.20414/2017), C.A.Nos. 6066-6072 of 2019 (arising out of SLP(C) No.20735- 20741/2017), C.A.No.6073 of 2019 (arising out of SLP(C) No.22383/2017), C.A. No.16916/2017 and C.A.No.6075 of 2019 (arising out of SLP(C) No.28455/2017) JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.Leave granted.2. These appeals, except one where leave to defend was granted, have been filed against the judgment of Delhi High Court dismissing the Rent Control Revisions filed by the appellants in which the order passed by the Rent Controller rejecting the 2 application filed by the appellants-tenants seeking leave to defend in a petition under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 have been challenged.3. The appellants are ten...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Sep-16-2019
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.7295 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (C) NO.8343 OF2019 STATE OF ODISHA & ANOTHER PETITIONER(S) VERSUS ANUP KUMAR SENAPATI & ANOTHER RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.7298 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (C) NO.29313 OF2018 CIVIL APPEAL NO7301OF2019(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (C) NO.32409 OF2018 CIVIL APPEAL No.7296 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (C) NO.16964 OF2018 CIVIL APPEAL No.7297 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (C) NO.17416 OF2018 (ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (C) No.22309 OF2019ARISING OUT OF CIVIL APPEAL No.7304 OF2019DIARY NO.31807 OF2018 CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 72997300 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (C) NOS.3111031111 OF2018 CIVIL APPEAL No.7302 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (C) NO.4261 OF2019 AND2CIVIL APPEAL No.7303 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (C) NO.6708 OF2019 ARUN MISHRA, J.JUDGMENT1 The question involved in the appeals is whether the employees are entitled to claim grantinaid as admissible under the Orissa (Non...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-22-2019
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.7477 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.13697 OF2016 RAMESH PARSRAM MALANI & ORS .....APPELLANT(S) THE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S) VERSUS JUDGMENT HEMANT GUPTA, J.1)2) The legality and validity of an order passed by the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Andhra Pradesh1 on February 26, 2003 is subject matter of consideration in the present appeal. Vide aforesaid order, 19.26 standard acres of land in Village Poppalguda, District Ranga Reddy was allotted to the appellant by the CCLA (as a delegatee of the Central Government) as balance of verified claim of 43.7 standard acres of land. Some facts would be necessary to appreciate the contention raised by the parties. One Parsram Ramchand Malani, father of the appellant, was resident of Sindh in the present-day Pakistan and 1 for short, CCLA 1 after partition, came to settle in Hyderabad. The father of the appellant asserted tha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Sep-02-2019
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:25. h July, 2019 Pronounced on:2. d September, 2019 CM(M) 340/2012 with CM APPL. 5107/2012 & 5519/2018 SUBHASH CHAND GOEL & ORS ........ Petitioners Through: Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Advocate. versus HANS RAJ GUPTA & CO PVT LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Kumar Gupta, Mr. Abhishek Paruthi, Mr. Sachin Kumar, Advocate for R-1. % CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN JUDGMENT1 By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners challenge an order dated 31.01.2012, passed by the Rent Control Tribunal in RCT No.49/2010, by which the Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the respondent herein, and set aside the order of the Additional Rent Controller dated 05.03.2010 evicting the respondent from the suit premises. Facts 2. The Eviction Petition was filed by the petitioners herein against the respondents on 11.08.2003, seeking the eviction of the respondent CM(M) 340/20...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-23-2019
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Pronounced on: April 23, 2019 W.P. (C) No.1735/2016, C.M. APPL. No.7433/2016 + GILLETTE INDIA LTD. ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Jayant K. Mehta, Mr. Shaurya Kuthiala, Mr. Kapil Arora, Ms. Nayan Jain, Ms. Suveni Bhagat, Mr. Rahul Kukreja, Mr. Shubhankar, Mr. Sajal Jain, Advocates. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & ORS. versus ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Sameer Jain, Standing Counsel, CBEC, Mr. Angad Sandhu, Mr. Suvigya Awasthy, Ms. Anu Suia, Mr.Karan Valecha, Mr. Anant Gupta, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % JUDGMENT Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. The question that has been referred to this larger Bench for decision by an order dated 9th March, 2016 of the Division Bench (DB) of this Court in the present petition is as follows: Notwithstanding that an importer may not have made the payment of W.P. (C) No.1735/2016 Page 1 of 28 the redemption fine duty interest and penalty within the time stip...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-26-2019
$~40 + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:26. h July, 2019 CRL. M.C. 4154/2018 & Crl.M.A. 30175/2018 STATE OF WEST BENGAL ........ Petitioner Through: Mr. Puneet Mittal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Tanveer A. Mir, Mr. Suhaan Mukherjee, Mr. Ravinder Singh, Ms. Raveesha Gupta, Mr. Amit Verma, Mr. Rishabh Surana, Mr. Prastut Dalvi & Ms. Astha Sharma, Advs. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Rahul Mehra, Standing counsel (criminal) with Mr.Chaitnaya Gosain, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Agarwal, Mr. Arshdeep Singh, Mr. Arjun Dewan, Mr. Arjun Mukherjee, Mr. Shahryan Khan & Ms. Sowjhanya, Advs. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA ORDER (ORAL) 1. The second respondent was arrested, inter alia, in the course of investigation of first information report (FIR) RC No.217 2018 A0003CBI/ACU-VI/AC-II/New Delhi of Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and came to be remanded to judicial custody by the court of Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act) sittin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-17-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:17. h January, 2019 * % + In Re: CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITY ....... Petitioner the J.M. Kalia, Advs. O. REF. No.2/2016 Through: Mr. for petitioner. Mr. Rajeev K. Virmani, Sr. Adv. (Amicus Curiae). CORAM:-"HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HONBLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW HONBLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.1. The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority (CCRA), Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) has made this Reference under Section 57 of the Stamp Act, 1899 seeking a decision on the following issue: Whether the notification no.13 of 25-12-1937 extending benefit of remission in stamp duty in case of subsidiary companies as applicable in the then province of Delhi has any continuous validity and applicability in view of notification No.GSR894dated 30-09-1958 by which the central government extended the Indian Stamp (Punjab Amendment) Act, 1958 replacing the previous and then prevalen...
Tag this Judgment!