Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act, 1972

4 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

JAI PRAKASH GUPTA (D) THR. LRS.versusRIYAZ AHAMAD & ANR.

2009 INSC 120628 October 2009Case Partly allowed

The appellant, the son of a deceased landlord, sought release of a shop under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act, 1972, claiming bonafide need to set up an office for his chartered‑accountancy practice. The Prescribed Authority rejected the application, but the app

BEOPAR SAHAYAK (P) LTD. & ORS.versusVISHWA NATH & ORS.

1987 INSC 16815 July 1987Dismissed

The appellant, Beopar Sahayak Ltd., sought possession of leased premises, but the respondents obtained a release order under Section 21 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act, 1972, issued by a Prescribed Authority who was an Executive Magistrate. The appellant challenged the order on

DURGA PRASADversusNARAYAN RAMCHANDAANI (D) THR. LRS.

2017 INSC 1167 February 2017Dismissed

The suit premises were originally let to the plaintiff's father‑in‑law in 1940; after his death the tenancy passed to his son Baldev, and subsequently to Baldev's wife Lalita. Upon Lalita's death, her brother Durga Prasad claimed to inherit the tenancy and resisted eviction by the landlord. The landlord filed an evicti

SUDHA AGRAWALversusXTH ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE AND ORS.

1999 INSC 3064 August 1999Dismissed

The landlord applied to the Prescribed Authority for eviction of the tenant on the ground of bonafide need, claiming that explanation (i) to the fourth proviso of Section 21(1) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act, 1972 barred the tenant from contesting and presumed his need to be bo

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search