<?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>1952 (1) TMI 30 - HIGH COURT OF NAGPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292833</link>
    <description>The term &quot;alterations&quot; in clause 13(3)(vii) of the Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 was held to have wide amplitude and to include substantial structural changes, including demolition, rebuilding, or strengthening necessary to make the premises fit for reconstruction. A restrictive reading confined to minor or superficial changes was rejected, and the landlord&#039;s request fell within the clause. A speaking order based on the mistaken view that the clause did not extend to such structural alterations disclosed an error of law apparent on the face of the record and was therefore liable to be quashed in certiorari. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh decision according to law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 1952 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Jan 2021 12:49:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=632539" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1952 (1) TMI 30 - HIGH COURT OF NAGPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292833</link>
      <description>The term &quot;alterations&quot; in clause 13(3)(vii) of the Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949 was held to have wide amplitude and to include substantial structural changes, including demolition, rebuilding, or strengthening necessary to make the premises fit for reconstruction. A restrictive reading confined to minor or superficial changes was rejected, and the landlord&#039;s request fell within the clause. A speaking order based on the mistaken view that the clause did not extend to such structural alterations disclosed an error of law apparent on the face of the record and was therefore liable to be quashed in certiorari. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh decision according to law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 1952 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292833</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>