<?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>1979 (8) TMI 217 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272581</link>
    <description>Section 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act is described as a narrow exception that operates only where its statutory conditions are strictly satisfied, including a valid sanction for a fixed-term residential letting. A sanction obtained by fraud, collusion, or non-compliance with those prerequisites is not protected by estoppel and may be examined even at the execution stage. On pleadings, the text states that an eviction application should be read substantially, so an implied reference to a written lease is sufficient where the pleading as a whole clearly conveys that fact. A mere verbal omission does not create a defect when no real deficiency in the cause of action exists.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 May 2018 18:19:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=519617" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (8) TMI 217 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272581</link>
      <description>Section 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act is described as a narrow exception that operates only where its statutory conditions are strictly satisfied, including a valid sanction for a fixed-term residential letting. A sanction obtained by fraud, collusion, or non-compliance with those prerequisites is not protected by estoppel and may be examined even at the execution stage. On pleadings, the text states that an eviction application should be read substantially, so an implied reference to a written lease is sufficient where the pleading as a whole clearly conveys that fact. A mere verbal omission does not create a defect when no real deficiency in the cause of action exists.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272581</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>