Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: karnataka traffic control act 1960 chapter 1 preliminary Court: andhra pradesh Page 1 of about 307 results (2.759 seconds)

Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad Rep. by Its Commissioner Vs. Philom ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2008(2)ALD1; 2008(1)ALT670

..... 18 of the karnataka small cause courts act and that a finding of fact based on oral evidence should not ordinarily be set aside by an appellate court save and except for strong ..... under the act.52. now the other judgments relied upon by the learned senior counsel sri s. satyanarayana prasad. in h. seshadri v. k.r. natarajan : [2003]3scr505 : 2003 (5) alt 28.1 (dn sc), the supreme court held that the high court had limited jurisdiction under section 50(1) of the karnataka rent control act and section ..... interlocutory mandatory injunction ultimately rested in the discretion of the court to be exercised in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case. in karnataka rare earth v. senior geologist, department of mines & geology : (2004)2scc783 , the supreme court held that the doctrine of actus curiae neminem gravabit was applicable .....

Md. KutubuddIn Vs. Bhaikar Raja Mitraji Anand Kumar and Others

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 1999(6)ALD83; 2000(1)ALT83

..... is only an interlocutory order and it does not fall within the purview of section 22 of a.p. buildings (lease, rent and eviction) control act, 1960, for short the 'act'. he added that the rent control act is a complete code. he cited catena of decisions in support of the above contention and they are reported in ms. jetha bai and sons ..... 115 cpc? ii. whether the amendments introduce new case or new cause of action and if so what is the effect ?it is well settled that the rent control act is a special enactment, by which the statutory protection is granted to the tenant and at the same time the landlord is provided with a speedier remedy. although code ..... may, at any time, on the application of any aggrieved parry, call for and examine the records relating to any order passed or proceeding taken under this act by the controller in execution under section 15 or by the appellate authority on appeal under section 20, for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality, regularity or propriety .....

E.V. Jagannadha Rao and ors. Vs. L.S. Eswara Rao and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2002(1)ALD845; 2002(1)ALT532

..... only premature but the decree passed therein was without jurisdiction. 18. in narayana gowda v. krishna madyastha, : air1976kant56 , the high court of karnataka held: under section 48(6) of the rent control act, it is not open to the executing court to question the validity of the order of eviction passed against the judgment-debtor. the section, however ..... as he was in possession as tenant of the premises under the plaintiffs, he would be entitled to protection afforded by the madras building (lease, rent control) act and that therefore no effective decree for delivery of possession could be passed in the case. the court observed that the second defendant could resist pleading his ..... undivided share of the entire property and not with reference to any 'building' or part of 'building' within the meaning of the madras buildings (lease and rent control) act. 24. the above case is clearly distinguishable. it was held in that case that it was not a case of letting out the building, but only an .....

iqbal Hyder Vs. Mohammed Wazeeruddin

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2001(1)ALD531; 2001(1)ALT597

..... the respondent landlord in respect of the demised premises viz., the wooden bunk and that the provisions of the andhra pradesh buildings (lease, rent and eviction) control act, 1966 (for short the 'act') apply to the same and that the appellant denied the title of the respondent mala fidely and committed default, dismissed the appeal. having been aggrieved by the ..... the box shop. it was also a wooden structure constructed out of a mango plank with iron hooks. since that structure was let out for business purposes, the karnataka high court was of the view that, it answers the definition of building. 14. it is obvious thus from a conspectus of the decisions referred to supra that ..... which it was let out would go in favour of the conclusion that it is nothing but a building as defined under section 2 (iii) of the act. that view is further re-enforced by the judgment of the karnataka high court. therefore, the premises in question comes clearly within the definition of building as given in the .....

St. theresa's Tender Loving Care Home rep. by Its Chief Co-ordinator V ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2009(4)ALT54

..... statement of accounts for the past three years.13. in 1960, parliament enacted orphanages and other charitable homes (supervision and control) act, 1960 (central act no. 10 of 1960) (hereafter called, the orphanage act) to provide supervision and control of orphanage homes, which, as per section 2(d) means an orphanage, a home for neglected women or children, ..... . section 2 is dictionary clause and section 3 is exclusionary clause. section 4 gives overriding effect of provisions of the act. chapter ii (sections 5 to 12) provides for establishment of 'board of control and supervision of homes' by the state government. the functions and powers of such board are indicated in sections 7 and ..... 8. it shall be duty of the board to supervise and control generally all matters relating to management of homes in accordance with provisions of the act. in discharging its duties, the board shall be bound by directions issued by state government. it shall have .....

Ramvilas Bajaj Vs. Ashok Kumar and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2007(4)ALD137; 2007(4)ALT348; AIR2007NOC2064(FB)(AP)

..... premises shall be made by any court or other authority in favour of the landlord against the tenant. the prohibition, in section 21(1) of the karnataka rent control act, was against the making of an order or decree for recovery of possession and not for the execution of a decree as is prescribed in section 10(1 ..... case in h. shiva rao's case (supra). with the inclusion of the village concerned within the limits of the cities under the karnataka municipal corporation act, the provisions of the rent control act were made applicable to property in question. by that time the landlord's suit for recovery of possession was decreed and the revision and review ..... petitions filed by the tenants were dismissed by the high court of karnataka. the supreme court construing section 21(1) of the karnataka rent control act which prohibited passing of any order or decree for recovery of possession by any court or other authority in favour of the .....

Smt.T.M.Nagarani and ors Vs. Ms.Andhra Tiles

Court : Andhra Pradesh

..... seeking eviction of the respondent under sections 10(2)(i) and 10(3)(iii)(a) of the a.p.buildings (lease, rent & eviction) control act, 1960 (for short 'the act'). the respondent raised an objection on the maintainability of eviction petition on the ground that even according to the petitioners, the rent of the building in ..... been in excess of rs.2,000/- and the demised premises falls in 'other areas' as per section 32(c) of the act, the act has no application and consequently, the rent controller is denuded of the jurisdiction to entertain the eviction petition filed by the petitioners. sri r.chandrashekar reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, ..... 500/-, it is eventually the plea of the petitioners which is relevant for the purpose of ascertaining the applicability of the provisions of the act and consequently, the jurisdiction of the rent controller. for this purpose, the petitioners cannot be permitted to rely on the stand of the respondent. in view of the above undisputed position .....

Morthala Chander Rao Vs. the Andhra Bank Rep. by Its Authorised Office ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2008(6)ALD780

..... averred that warangal town, where the aforesaid premises located, is a corporation and the provisions of andhra pradesh building (lease, rent and eviction) control act, 1960 (for short 'the 1960 act') are applicable to the residential and commercial buildings located within the limits of warangal municipal corporation. since the rent payable by the petitioner in ..... the facts of this case. we are therefore of the view that the securitisation act has got overriding effect over the kerala buildings (lease and rent control) act and parties are governed by the securitistion act and not by the rent control act.6. we are not impressed by the arguments of the counsel for the petitioner ..... ltd's case (1st supra), learned judge of karnataka high court while dealing with sections 13, 14, 17 and 35 of the act and also sections 69, 69a, 106 and 107 of the transfer of property act, 1882 and certain provisions of the state financial corporation act as well laid down that the banking institution can .....

Mohd. Saber Vs. Rafiunnisa Begum (died) per LRs and Others

Court : Andhra Pradesh

..... would contend that the suit was instituted in the year 2001 and even as per the contentions of the defendant the amendment to the rent control act was by virtue of act 7/05 and, therefore, the amended provisions which have no retrospective effect have no application to the case on hand as the suit for ..... contend that the buildings whose rents are up to rs.3,500/- in municipality areas continued to be covered by the rent control act and, therefore, the defendant is entitled to protection of the rent control act and he cannot be evicted by having resort to a civil suit for eviction. however, the learned counsel for the plaintiffs ..... not pay any rent to the respondent bona fide believing the devasthanam to be the owner. in a proceeding before the rent controller under the tamil nadu buildings (lease, and rent control) act, 1960, the rent controller and had rejected this defence and had ordered eviction. the appellant had filed an appeal. the appellate authority had confirmed the .....

V. Srisailam Vs. V. Krishna Murthy and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2003(1)ALD500

..... whose occupation the premises is required the landlord cannot maintain a petition. under section 10(iii)(c) of the a. p. buildings (lease, rent and eviction) control act, 1960, the pleadings ought to be specific. the petition- r.c. no. 354 of 1986 was filed by buggaiah for expanding his business and/or for starting ..... were different, that every partner was filing income tax returns separately and that every partner had acquired individual properties. ex.a.43 is certified copy of rent control petition filed by buggaiah for evicting tenants from item 6 of 'a' schedule. considerable emphasis is laid on the document by plaintiff and fifth defendant to ..... property, collected rents from tenants and whenever there was litigation between either of defendants 1 to 4 individually and with their respective tenants, they approached the rent control tribunal and got the tenants evicted. there is no presumption in law that whenever the sons become partners of the firm, the business becomes the joint family .....