Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
4 judgments · newest first · showing 1–4
The appellant, G.D. Gupta, occupied a building in Danapur Cantonment under an invalid lease deed. The owner sued for eviction and arrears of rent, and during the pendency the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1947 was extended to the area on 14‑02‑1970 with prospective effect. The 1974 …
The Supreme Court examined whether the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (Act 13) applies to cantonment areas in Uttar Pradesh and whether the Central Government’s notifications of 1 Sept 1973 and 17 Feb 1982, issued under the Cantonments (Extension …
The case concerned a government servant, S.P. Jain, who was ordered to vacate his government‑allotted quarters and sought immediate possession of the first floor of his own house in Meerut cantonment, which was let to K.M. Gupta. Jain filed an eviction petition under sections 24B and 24C of the U.P. …
The landlord sought eviction of a shop in Ambala Cantonment on the ground that the tenant, Gurcharan Singh, had sub-let the premises without his written consent, invoking Section 13(2)(ii)(a) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949. The Rent Controller and appellate authority held that …
