Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
9 judgments · newest first · showing 1–9
The Supreme Court considered an appeal by the heirs of a deceased tenant (the appellants) against an eviction decree. The landlords had terminated the tenancy and sued for eviction, rent, damages and mesne profits. After the U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 …
The Municipal Board leased premises to the respondents, who sublet them to the appellants. After the lease expired, the Board demanded rent, and the appellants deposited the rent in court under Section 30(2) of the U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, citing …
The appeal concerned the determination of the earliest deemed date of construction under Explanation (a) of Section 2(2) of the U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972. The Supreme Court held that the deemed construction date is the earliest of (i) the date the local …
The appellant, a tenant, was required under Section 39 of the U.P. (Urban Building Regulation of Letting Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 to deposit arrears, interest and costs within one month to avoid eviction. He deposited Rs 1,944 instead of the required Rs 2,048 due to a calculation error, leaving …
The landlords (appellants) filed an eviction petition under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, claiming a bonafide need for a shop premises. The prescribed authority dismissed the petition, but the appellate authority reversed the …
Rani Devi, the landlady, filed a suit under section 21 of the U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of letting, rent and eviction) Act, 1972 seeking eviction of the occupants, Bhole Nath and others, on the ground of a bona‑fide requirement to start a business for her son. The original tenant, Lalu, died …
The landlord filed a suit for eviction of the tenant alleging non-payment of rent of Rs 70 per month, which included a Rs 30 charge for furniture supplied by the landlord. The tenant contended that the house rent was only Rs 40 per month and that the Rs 30 was a separate furniture charge, which he …
Shiv Kumar, a landlord, filed an eviction suit on 11 June 1973 under the U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, claiming the Act did not apply because the shop was constructed in 1966 and was exempt for ten years. The tenants argued that the Act did apply and that …
Bal Niketan Nursery School, a recognised institution under the U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 and run by a registered society, purchased land and super‑structures in its own name and, through its manager (who was also the society's secretary), served notice to four tenants and filed suits for …
