JHUMMAN SINGH AND ORS.versusCENTRAL BOARD OF INVESTIGATION AND ORS.
1995 INSC 23530 March 1995Case Allowed
The petitioners, tenants of four shops, alleged that the third respondent fraudulently obtained two court decrees from Gauhati and Gaya to evict them from their premises, purchasing the decrees and powers of attorney for a sum of rupees twenty thousand each. They sought a writ under Article 32 directing the CBI to inve…
GANDHE VIJAY KUMARversusMULJI @ MULCHAND
2017 INSC 67827 July 2017Appeal(s) allowed
The dispute involved a landlord‑tenant relationship where the Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority both held that the landlord satisfied the bonafide requirement under the Rent Control Act. The High Court, exercising revisional jurisdiction, set aside those findings, stating it could re‑appreciate the evidence t…
MANISHA LALWANIversusD.V. PAUL
2009 INSC 6965 May 2009Disposed off
The High Court, in a rent‑control suit, passed a conditional decree directing the tenant to deposit Rs 10,000 in the trial court within four months, failing which the tenant would be evicted under Section 12(1) of the Rent Control Act. The tenant did not make the deposit and applied for an extension of time, prompting …
PRAFUL MANOHAR RELEversusSMT. KRISHNABAI NARAYAN GHOSALKAR & ORS.
2014 INSC 33 January 2014Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff, Praful Manohar Rele, sued the heirs of Narayan Keshav Ghosalkar for possession of a house, alleging that they occupied it as gratuitous licensees whose licence had been validly terminated. The defendants counter‑claimed that they were tenants and sought eviction under the Bombay Rent Act. The trial court…