REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

GOVIND RAM Appellant

V/S

Mukesh and Others Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

BANKE RAM VS. SARASVATI DEVI [REFERRED TO]
DEENA NATH VS. POORAN LAL [REFERRED TO]
PRABHA ARORA AND ANOTHER VS. BRIJ MOHINI ANAND AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
JAI PRAKASH GUPTA (D) THR. LRS VS. RIYAZ AHAMAD AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
VINOD KUMAR VS ARUNA JAIN AND ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
MAQBOOLUNNISA VS. MOHAMMAD SALEHA QUARAISHI [REFERRED TO]
GAYA PRASAD VS. PRADEEP SRIVASTAVA [REFERRED TO]
SANTOSH HAZARI VS. PURUSHOTTAM TIWARI [REFERRED TO]
MADHUKAR VS. SANGRAM [REFERRED TO]
KEMPAIAH VS. LINGAIAH [REFERRED TO]
SHAKUNTALA BAI VS. NARAYAN DAS [REFERRED TO]
SAIT NAGJEE PURUSHOTHAM and CO LTD VS. VIMALABAI PRABHULAL [REFERRED TO]
S SANKARAN VS. D KAUSALYA [REFERRED TO]
ROMESH KUMAR VS. ATMA DEVI [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Chunni Lal (since deceased) filed petition under Section 13 of Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973 seeking ejectment of Govind Ram, revision-petitioner from the demised premises i.e. Shop no. 106 situated in New Sabzi Mandi, Palwal on the ground that his married son Neeraj was unemployed after completing graduation and was dependent on him. Neeraj intended to start his own kiryana business in the shop in dispute and landlord-Chunni Lal wanted to settle him during his life time.

(2.) Learned Rent Controller, Palwal found need of landlordChunni Lal as not bona fide. Conclusions drawn by learned Rent Controller were based on following observations:-

(3.) Taking note of above facts, learned Rent Controller held that the need of landlord-Chunni Lal is not bona fide.

Click here to view full judgment.

GOVIND RAM Vs. MUKESH AND OTHERS

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address