Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
5 judgments · newest first · showing 1–5
Messrs Rajasthan Motors, a tenant, challenged an order of the Additional District Judge that directed it to deposit fifty percent of the monthly rent during the pendency of its appeal against a rent determination order. The petitioner argued that a one‑time pre‑deposit made at the time of filing the …
Messrs Hind Wheels, a tenant, filed a petition under Article 227 challenging an order of the Additional District Judge that, in an appeal, directed it to deposit 50% of the monthly rent despite having already made the statutory pre‑deposit under Section 35(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban …
Messrs Carmen, a tenant, challenged an order of the Additional District Judge that directed it to deposit 50% of the monthly rent while an appeal was pending. The petitioner argued that it had already made the statutory pre‑deposit required under Section 35(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Regulation of …
The petitioners and respondents entered into a registered rent agreement on 13‑03‑2015 for eleven years, which expired on 12‑03‑2026. The respondents had obtained a temporary injunction against the petitioners in a suit for permanent injunction, and the petitioners appealed the trial court's order …
The petitioner, Smt. Neetu Agarwal, filed a writ petition under Section 21(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021, seeking a direction to the Rent Authority (respondent No.3) to decide her tenancy case (Case No. 1600 of 2025) expeditiously. The petitioner argued that …
