<?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>2005 (3) TMI 815 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295904</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court upheld the High Court&#039;s decision, affirming that the tenancy was joint, rent exceeded Rs. 3500, making the Delhi Rent Control Act inapplicable. The notice under Section 106 was valid, and objections regarding the revision petition and lease deed registration were dismissed. The Special Leave Petition was thus dismissed, upholding the eviction decree passed by the High Court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2021 11:22:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=647716" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (3) TMI 815 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295904</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court upheld the High Court&#039;s decision, affirming that the tenancy was joint, rent exceeded Rs. 3500, making the Delhi Rent Control Act inapplicable. The notice under Section 106 was valid, and objections regarding the revision petition and lease deed registration were dismissed. The Special Leave Petition was thus dismissed, upholding the eviction decree passed by the High Court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295904</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>