REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

BISHAN CHAND Appellant

V/S

DISTRICT JUDGE, ALIGARH Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

RAVI SHANKER V. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,IIND KANPUR AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
SHRI ZARIF AHMAD V. RENT CONTROL AND EVICTION OFFICER,GHAZIABAD AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
NARENDRA SINGH SIROHI AND ANOTHER V. R.C. AND E.O.,MEERUT AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
SMT. BARFI DEVI AND OTHERS V. ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE,BULANDSHAHAR AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
VIRENDRA KUMAR AND OTHERS V. S.P. SINGH AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
SMT. PREM DEVI NIGAM V. RENT CONTROL AND EVICTION OFFICER,BAREILLY AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
JASWANT SINGH V. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,DEHRADUN AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
SUBHASH CHANDRA BHATNAGAR V. VIIITH ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE,MEERUT AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
GANESHI RAM ALIAS TOTA RAM V. IST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE,DEHRADUN AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
NAND KISHORE TRIPATHI V. DISTRICT JUDGE,SHAHJAHANPUR AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
MAHENDRA KUMAR TRIPATHI V. ADDITIONAL CITY MAGISTRATE,KANPUR NAGAR AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
GANPAT ROY SMT KAUSHAL REKHI VS. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE:AUTHORISED OFFICER RANIKHET [REFERRED TO]
NARAYANI DEVI VS. MAHENDRA KR TRIPATHI [REFERRED TO]
MIRZA SAMIULLAH BAIG VS. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE LUCKNOW [REFERRED TO]
RAVINDRA PRATAP SINGH VS. VIII ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE VARANASI [REFERRED TO]
URMILA DEVI VS. IIND ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE MEERUT [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is landlord's petition.

(2.) The dispute relates to House No. 9/49 situated in Ahata Nidhan Singh, Talab Sabir Khan, Aligarh, whose previous owner was one Smt. Pratlbha Rani before the said properly was purchased by the petitioners through registered sale deed dated 4.11.1981.

(3.) Smt. Pratlbha Rani filed S.C.C. Suit No. 876 of 1972 against her tenant Narendra Kumar alleging that the tenant has sub-let the house to Ram Kishore Gupta, the father of respondent No. 3 and husband of respondent No. 4. Ram Kishore Gupta who was impleaded as defendant No. 2 in the said suit filed written statement admitting the ownership of Smt. Pratibha Rani. However, his defence was that the house in question was taken on rent on behalf of joint Hindu family and he being a member of the family also became a tenant of the plaintiff Smt. Pratibha Rani and, therefore, there has been no sub-letting and suit for eviction was liable to be dismissed.

Click here to view full judgment.

BISHAN CHANDS Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE ALIGARH

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address