Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
4 judgments · newest first · showing 1–4
The appellant, Rakesh Vij, challenged an eviction order against his father’s tenancy in a shop‑cum‑flat in Chandigarh, arguing that the landlord could not evict a tenant from a non‑residential building under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 as amended in 1974. The Court examined the …
The landlord, Joginder Pal, filed an eviction petition under Section 13(3)(a)(ii) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, claiming the premises were needed for the office of his chartered‑accountant son. The tenant, Naval Kishore Behal, occupied the premises for non‑residential purposes …
The appellant, a landlord of a non‑residential shop, sought to evict his tenant on the ground of bona‑fide personal use, a right that had been removed by the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction (Amendment) Act, 1956. He challenged the amendment as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, arguing …
Gulraj Singh Grewal rented a building in Ludhiana from Dr. Harbans Singh and his son. The landlords sought eviction on three grounds under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1948: personal need, change of user, and impairment of value. The Rent Controller dismissed the petition; the …
