Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: karnataka rent control act 2001 section 34 sub tenant to be tenant in certain cases Page 93 of about 2,195 results (0.125 seconds)

Devaki Vs. P.Sarojini

Court : Kerala

..... 2014 ------------------------------------------ dated this the 20th day of february, 2014 order k.t.sankaran,j.concurrent findings of the rent control court and the appellate authority under section 11(3) of the kerala buildings (lease and rent control) act are under challenge by the tenant of a residential house.2. the respondents mother and two children, filed ..... the rent control petition under section 11(2)(b) and 11 (3) of the act. we are not concerned with the ground under section 11( ..... r.c rev.no. 32 of 2014 :2. : (5 to7are residing c/o. ananda tailor mudaikodi house, banyanpadavu village and post bantwal taluk, d k district, karnataka. by adv. sri.r.sreehari respondents/respondents/petitioners: ------------------------------------ 1. p.sarojini, 72 years, w/o. late p.k. kunhiraman.2. p.k. rachana, 36 years .....

Rajendra Diwan Vs. Pradeep Kumar Ranibala

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... exercise appellate powers.89. for the reasons discussed above, we hold that the state legislature lacked legislative competence to enact section 13(2) of the rent control act. we, therefore, declare section 13(2) of the rent control act ultra vires the constitution of india, null and void and of no effect. ..j [arun mishra]. .... ............................j.[indira banerjee]. .. ...j ..... has referred the appeal to this bench.6. the question which requires to be determined by this bench is, whether section 13(2) of the rent control act is ultra vires the constitution of india, by reason of lack of legislative competence of the chhattisgarh state legislature to enact the provision. before dealing ..... accordance with these provisions of the constitution.32. the learned attorney general referred to the decision of this court in k.k. poonacha vs. state of karnataka and ors. reported in (2010) 9 scc671 which interprets, inter alia, article 31(3) of the constitution, as it stood prior to its repeal. .....

R.V. Bhupal Prasad Vs. Saleha Begum Alias Shehensha Begum and 17 ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2001(5)ALT770

..... efflux of time. appellant contested the suit contending that respondents 2 to 18 have no interest in the suit property, and that 1st respondent having initiated proceedings under the rent control act cannot invoke the jurisdiction of the civil court for eviction. during the fag end of the proceedings before the trial court, he filed two additional written statements on ..... the revision and the other two r.c.cs. filed by her, because the suit property which was earlier governed by the rent control act, were subsequently taken out of the purview of the provisions of the rent control act by virtue of g.o.ms.no.636 dated 29.12.1983. it is thus seen that in her endeavour to get back ..... and on the other side there must be a definite consent to the continuance of possession by the landlord expressed by acceptance of rent or otherwise'.12. following he above decision a division bench of the karnataka high court in m/s sudershan trading co ltd v. m/s l.d' souza 21 held that no notice is required .....

State of Bihar and Others Vs. Sachchidanand Kishore Prasad Sinha and O ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1995SC885; JT1995(1)SC458; (1995)3SCC86; [1995]1SCR256

..... 1,200/- only. it is not stated by the respondents-writ petitioners that this low rent is because of the applicability of the rent control act and the fixation of fair rent. but for the applicability of the rent control act and fixation of fair rent thereunder, it is difficult to believe-the respondents' case that a property of the above ..... , fanciful, arbitrary or clearly unjust.18. reference may also be had to the recent decision of this court in p.m. ashwathanarayana setty v. state of karnataka , where venkatachaliah, j., speaking for the court made the following pertinent observations:the lack of perfection in a legislative measure does not necessarily imply its unconstitutionality. ..... income tax officer, shillong and anr. etc. v. n. takim roy rymbai etc. etc. (supra). also see the observation in mrs. meenakshi and ors v. state of karnataka (supra); anant mills co. ltd. v. state of gujarat and ors. (supra) and khandige sham bhat and ors. v. the agricultural income-tax officer. (supra).14 .....

Vinod Nagpal Vs. Bakshi S. Kuljas Rai

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 37(1989)DLT278

..... intended for use as a working or dwelling place'. (20) it is thus clear that the property in order to be 'premises' within the contemplation of delhi rent control act has to be in the nature of a roofed structure, or containing such structures thereon. any property which is described as a vacant plot simpliciter, in document witnessing ..... existed at the time of letting, namely, there were superstructures on the plot, which converted the nature of the property into 'premises', within the meaning of delhi rent control act. (10) he further contended that the real question before the court was as to what was the character of the property at the time of inception i ..... determined by reference to the property that was actually let out. i say so, despite a reference by learned counsel for the appellant to a full bench judgment of karnataka high court, reported as : govinda naik g kalghatagi v west patent press co ltd , : air1980kant95 , because learned counsel for the respondent has referred me to .....

Deendayal Daga, Director M/S. Assam Timber Products Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs ...

Court : Delhi

..... . santokh singh (huf) (2008) 2 scc728 has been held to be not relevant if the proceedings for eviction have been pending for over 15 days.19. not knowing of any rent control act of the year 1999, mentioned in para 4(d) of the memorandum of this petition reproduced above, i have enquired about the same from the counsel for the petitioners.20 ..... has waived the right of eviction under the act.17. i find the high court of karnataka also to have in bharat petroleum corporation ltd. vs. mohammed haneef choohey air1986kar 191 relying on v. dhanapal chettiar vs. yesodai ammal (1979) 4 scc214 held that when the landlord seeks to enforce his right under the rent act, the contract to the contrary cannot be set .....

G.S. Gupta Vs. Basheer Ahamed and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1977Kant193; ILR1977KAR1359; 1977(2)KarLJ258

..... jurisdiction to correct its own error and perhaps the plea may not be sustainable that a decision of the high court in a revision under s. 50 of karnataka house rent control act, 1961 was not per se subject to review. but the question before the court is, as to whether a miscarriage of justice had really resulted or any ..... judgment of this court dated 31-3-1977 in c. r. p. no. 1086/1974, allowing the petition of the landlord under s. 21(1)(h) of the karnataka house rent control act, 1961 in h. r. c. no. 544/1966 and thereby asking the petitioner-tenant to vacate the schedule premises.2. as evident, the petition for eviction was filed ..... that case before the court was that the judgment of the high court was in a revision preferred under s. 50 of the karnataka house rent control act, 1961 and since no review is provided against the judgment in that act, the petition for review was not maintainable. while answering that preliminary objection raised in that case, his lordship referred to arts. .....

M. Arul Jothi and anr. Vs. Lajja Bal (Deceased) and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2000SC1122; 2000(3)ALT19(SC); 2000(1)CTC687; JT2000(2)SC522; RLW2000(1)SC135; 2000(2)SCALE155; (2000)3SCC723; [2000]2SCR1; 2000(1)LC632(SC)

..... would have no consequence and thus would not defeat the tenant's right. for ready reference section 10(2)(ii)(b) of the tamil nadu buildings (lease and rent control) act 1960 is also quoted below:10. eviction of tenants : (1) a tenant shall not be evicted whether in execution of a decree or otherwise except in accordance ..... j.1. the question raised in this appeal is the interpretation of section 10(2)(ii)(b) of the tamil nadu buildings (lease and rent control) act 1960. the question is whether in terms of the rent agreement between the appellant (tenant) and the respondent (landlord), if the tenant uses the shop for a different purpose than the one specified ..... according to the appellant the purpose of the user still remains commercial and that in the rent note there was no clause prohibiting the appellant to change any other business in the shop in dispute.(emphasis supplied)7. next reliance is on state of karnataka v. ayyanahalli bakappa and sons : (1988)3scc587 . this is a case where .....

M.P. Rawla Vs. S.D. Tyagi

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 44(1991)DLT434

..... obviously after appreciation of evidence and it is not permissible for this court to disturb these findings of fact, more so in revision under section 25b(8) of the delhi rent control act. (13) what accommodation is required 'bonafide' is not to be understood as indefinitely enlarging the choice of the landlord and leaving it to his own subjective discretion. in smt. kamla ..... trial court has further found that although the petitioner's family at that moment consisted only of three members, as hiss on admittedly was doing an engineering course in mangalore, karnataka, his daughter, shalini, was doing management course at ahmedabad. only, the other daughter. samita, was living with him at delhi and thereforee for three members two rooms were quite adequate .....

L.Rs. of Tribhuvan Dutt Vs. Jai Narayan

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : RLW2009(4)Raj3364

..... legal heirs of statutory tenant after his death would not be covered by the provisions of state rent control act and besides protection available under the state rent control act would not be bound by obligations and grounds of eviction established under the state rent control act. therefore, irrespective of the heirs of the statutory tenant stepping into the shoes of statutory tenant ..... upon these four legal representatives of the deceased appellant tenant tribhuvan dutt, they were entitled to be brought on record and were entitled to same protection under the rent control act, 1950 as the appellant defendant, was and, therefore, the present appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned order dated 1.4.2008 deserves to be ..... smt. ramjeevani v. narati bai 1991 (1) r.l.w. 222(2) tara chand and anr. v. ram prasad 1990 uj (s.c.) 157(3) government of karnataka and ors. v. gowramma 2008 (1) srj 227(4) kanhiya singh santok singh and ors. v. kartar singh : air 2009 sc 1600(5) vinay kr. khambate v. .....