Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
3 judgments · newest first · showing 1–3
The Supreme Court examined whether a tenant who tendered rent by money order, which the landlord refused to accept, was required to deposit the rent with the Rent Controller under Section 27 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. The Court held that the word "may" in Section 27 is to be read as …
The tenant, Atma Ram, repeatedly sent money orders for rent which the landlord refused to accept and later deposited the arrears for February 1992 to January 1995 under the Punjab Relief of Indebtedness Act, 1934. The landlord rejected that deposit and the tenant subsequently deposited rent for …
Mangat Rai and another, tenants, deposited all arrears of rent, future rent, interest and costs in the court of a Senior Sub‑Judge under Section 31 of the Punjab Relief of Indebtedness Act, 1934. The landlord sued for eviction under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, …
