We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic • Quick overview summary answering your query with references• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced • Includes everything in Basic • Detailed report covering: - Overview Summary - Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars] - Relevant Case Laws - Tariff / Classification / HSN - Expert views from TaxTMI - Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Timing is Key: Proviso on Tenants' Release Application Clarified The Supreme Court held that the application for release of accommodation under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Building Act, 1972, was maintainable ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Timing is Key: Proviso on Tenants' Release Application Clarified
The Supreme Court held that the application for release of accommodation under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Building Act, 1972, was maintainable within three years of purchase. The Court clarified that the proviso prohibits entertaining such applications within three years of purchase, not registration. As the application was made after three years from the purchase date, the proviso did not apply. Consequently, the tenant's appeal against eviction was dismissed, and they were given until April 30, 1981, to vacate the premises.
Issues involved: Eviction under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Building Act, 1972; Interpretation of proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 21; Date of purchase of accommodation affecting application for release of accommodation.
Summary: 1. The tenant appealed against a decree of eviction initiated by the landlady under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Building Act, 1972. The High Court held that the application for release of accommodation was maintainable within three years of purchase. The tenant then sought special leave contending that the proviso to Section 21 prohibits entertaining such applications within three years of purchase. The Supreme Court granted leave to decide the substantial question of law on this issue.
2. After the grant of leave, the landlady contended that the accommodation was purchased earlier than claimed by the tenant, affecting the applicability of the proviso. The Court decided to hear the appeal on merits based on the date of purchase of the accommodation.
3. The original sale deed showed the accommodation was purchased on July 27, 1974, not in November as claimed. The Court clarified that the proviso prohibits entertaining an application within three years of purchase, not registration. As the application was made after three years from purchase, the proviso did not apply. The appeal was dismissed, and the tenant was given time until April 30, 1981, to vacate the premises.
Separate Judgement: No separate judgment was delivered by the judges in this case.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
