PT. RISHIKESH AND ANR. ETC. versus SMT. SALMA BEGUM ETC. ETC.

Order 15 Rule 5 of CPC as amended by Uttar Pradesh Acts is neither repugnant under Article 254 nor discriminatory under Article 14; the Central Act does not occupy the field regarding Rule 5, and as such, State law remains valid; Section 97(3) of the Central Amendment Act applies retrospectively.

Parties: Appellant: Pt. Rishikesh; Respondent: Smt. Salma Begum
Jurisdiction: India
Judgment Date: 02 May 1995
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Appeal From Full Bench Judgment of Allahabad High Court, by Certificate Under Article 133
Outcome: Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics: Repugnancy Under Article 254, Striking Off Defence of Tenant, Discrimination Under Article 14, Retrospective Operation of Amendment

Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Rent Control Repugnancy Under Article 254 Striking Off Defence of Tenant Discrimination Under Article 14 Retrospective Operation of Amendment

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2

Parties

Pt. Rishikesh

Appellant

Smt. Salma Begum

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Full Bench Judgment of Allahabad High Court, by Certificate Under Article 133

Legal Issues

1 Whether Order 15 Rule 5 of CPC as amended by U.P. Acts is repugnant to CPC Central (Amendment) Act, 1976 under Article 254 of the Constitution
2 Whether Order 15 Rule 5 violates Article 14 of the Constitution
3 Whether CPC Central (Amendment) Act, 1976 operates retrospectively

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

Order 15 Rule 5 remains valid law and applies retrospectively to pending proceedings
No costs awarded