<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2008 (4) TMI 722 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175924</link>
    <description>A statutory classification under the Delhi Rent Control Act that confined bona fide requirement eviction to residential premises was found to lack a continuing rational nexus with the object of the law under Article 14, because the historical basis for the distinction had disappeared with changed conditions. The restriction was therefore treated as unconstitutional insofar as it excluded non-residential premises. The objectionable words were then severed, since the remaining text could operate independently and still preserve a complete ground of eviction based on bona fide requirement and absence of reasonably suitable accommodation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2015 21:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=408141" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (4) TMI 722 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175924</link>
      <description>A statutory classification under the Delhi Rent Control Act that confined bona fide requirement eviction to residential premises was found to lack a continuing rational nexus with the object of the law under Article 14, because the historical basis for the distinction had disappeared with changed conditions. The restriction was therefore treated as unconstitutional insofar as it excluded non-residential premises. The objectionable words were then severed, since the remaining text could operate independently and still preserve a complete ground of eviction based on bona fide requirement and absence of reasonably suitable accommodation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175924</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>