Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

TEK CHAND versus SAT NARAYAN

Supreme Court Cases

1989 SCR Supl. (1) 121 JT 1989 (3) 740 1989 SCALE (2)668

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


TEK CHAND V. SAT NARAYAN [1989] RD-SC 276 (14 September 1989)

MUKHARJI, SABYASACHI (J) MUKHARJI, SABYASACHI (J) VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J) VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (CJ) SINGH, K.N. (J) NATRAJAN, S. (J)

CITATION: 1989 SCR Supl. (1) 121 JT 1989 (3) 740 1989 SCALE (2)668

ACT:

Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973:

Sections 1(3) and 13--Applicability of the Act--Fixed period of exemption from applicability--Exemption continues until suit is disposed of or adjudicated.

HEADNOTE:

Applying the principle enunciated in Atma Ram Mittal v.

Ishwar Singh Punia, [1988] 4 SCC 284, this Court dismissed the special leave petition, and,

HELD: 1.1 The exemption would apply for a period of ten years and will continue to be available until suit is dis- posed of or adjudicated. [121H]

1.2 If the petitioner fails to file an undertaking on usual terms, the decree shall become executable forthwith.

[122B]

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (C) No. 5628 of 1988.

From the Judgment and Order dated 4.1.1988 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Regular Second Appeal No. 9 18 of 1987.

P.P. Rao and Shakeel Ahmed for the Petitioner.

S.C. Maheshwari, P.K. Chakravarti, Ms. Sandhya Goswami and V.K. Bhardwaj for the Respondent.

The following Order of the Court was delivered We have heard this case arising out of Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act 1973. We feel that this case is fully covered by the decision of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sabyasachi Mukharji & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranganathan in Atma Ram Mittal v. Ishwar Singh Punia, 122 [1988] 4 S.C.C. 284. We respectfully agree with the princi- ple enunciated in that decision. The special leave petition is dismissed.

Learned counsel for the respondent Mr. S.C. Maheshwari states that the decree will not be executed till 30th April, 1990 subject to an undertaking on usual terms being filed in this Court within four weeks from today. If the undertaking is not filed, the decree shall become executable forthwith.

G.N. Petition dis- missed.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.