<?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>1998 (8) TMI 643 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300286</link>
    <description>Under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, bona fide requirement includes examination of whether the landlord has any other reasonably suitable residential accommodation, so the pleadings and surrounding facts must be read together to test the genuineness of the need. The landlord&#039;s non-disclosure of accommodation at Subzi Mandi was not fatal where both sides understood the real controversy and relevant material was before the Court. The High Court could interfere in revision under the proviso to Section 25B(8) because the Rent Controller had treated non-disclosure as decisive on a wrong legal premise; revisional power extends to correcting errors of law and ensuring that findings rest on a proper legal basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2022 11:02:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=667866" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (8) TMI 643 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300286</link>
      <description>Under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, bona fide requirement includes examination of whether the landlord has any other reasonably suitable residential accommodation, so the pleadings and surrounding facts must be read together to test the genuineness of the need. The landlord&#039;s non-disclosure of accommodation at Subzi Mandi was not fatal where both sides understood the real controversy and relevant material was before the Court. The High Court could interfere in revision under the proviso to Section 25B(8) because the Rent Controller had treated non-disclosure as decisive on a wrong legal premise; revisional power extends to correcting errors of law and ensuring that findings rest on a proper legal basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300286</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>