<?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>2014 (12) TMI 1400 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304150</link>
    <description>Landlord&#039;s bona fide need was treated as genuine where the requirement was to settle a widowed daughter, and suitability of the premises had to be assessed from the landlord&#039;s perspective. The tenant could not insist that the proposed coaching activity be confined to the upper floors. The alleged five-year rent agreement was denied and was not relied on by the courts below; once ignored, it did not bar the eviction petition. The tenancy was treated as a statutory tenancy under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, so eviction could be pursued on statutory grounds despite any contractual arrangement. The eviction was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Sep 2022 07:01:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=690284" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (12) TMI 1400 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304150</link>
      <description>Landlord&#039;s bona fide need was treated as genuine where the requirement was to settle a widowed daughter, and suitability of the premises had to be assessed from the landlord&#039;s perspective. The tenant could not insist that the proposed coaching activity be confined to the upper floors. The alleged five-year rent agreement was denied and was not relied on by the courts below; once ignored, it did not bar the eviction petition. The tenancy was treated as a statutory tenancy under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, so eviction could be pursued on statutory grounds despite any contractual arrangement. The eviction was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304150</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>