RAJINDER KUMAR BANSAL & Ors. v. MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
The appeal is allowed
Provisions considered
Judgment
1.2 The tenant has constructed a pavilion in the year 1911 and the said pavilion was mortgaged to the District Board. The District Boards were constituted as part of local self-Government under the Punjab District Boards Act, 1883. The said Act was repealed when the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 was enacted. The High Court was erroneous in holding that the land let out to the club used for pavilion is not for the purpose of business. Since the finding of fact was recorded by the Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority has not been disputed, therefore, the order of the eviction was rightfully passed against the respondents. The order passed by the High Court is set aside. [Para 14-16][236-B- E]
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The appeal is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 — s. 2(f); Punjab District Boards Act, 1883; Punjab Municipal Act, 1911; Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 115; East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 — s. 2(f).
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.