SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 112

G.N.RAY, G.T.NANAVATI
Ram Saran – Appellant
Versus
Pyare Lal – Respondent


Judgement Key Points

Based on the provided legal document, the assessment of rent does not solely depend on the presence of a formal rental agreement or deed. The document indicates that acceptance of rent by the landlord, even without a written agreement, can be relevant in establishing certain legal positions. However, for the creation of a valid sub-tenancy or for legal recognition of a tenancy, written consent from the landlord is generally required under the applicable rent control laws.

Specifically, the document emphasizes that mere acceptance of rent by the landlord, even if done with knowledge of occupation or subletting, does not automatically establish a lawful tenancy or sub-tenancy if there is no written agreement or consent. The law prioritizes written agreements and explicit consent to validate the tenancy relationship, and the absence of such documentation can undermine the legal assessment of rent and tenancy rights.

In summary, while rent can sometimes be assessed based on payments and acceptance without a formal deed, the legal validity of such arrangements heavily relies on the existence of proper documentation and compliance with statutory requirements. Without a rental agreement or deed, the rent may be difficult to legally assess or enforce, especially in cases involving sub-letting or tenancy disputes.


JUDGMENT

G.N. Ray, J.-Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 23.6.1992 passed by a Single Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in C.R. No. 134 of 1992 arising out of judgment dated 16.5.1990 passed by the Appellate Authority (II), Solan in Rent Appeal No. 5 NL/14 of 1990/1988 reversing the order of eviction dated 30.9.1988 passed by the Rent Controller. Nalagarh in Case No. 6/2 of 1986.

3. The relevant facts concerning this appeal may be stated as hereunder. The shop room appertaining to khewat-khatanni No. Min. 354/498, Khasra No. 734, in Main Bazar, Nalagarh town is owned by the appellant landlord. The appellant let out the said shop room to respondent No. 1 on 15.7.1973 for a monthly rental at Rs. 140/- excluding water and electric charges. The said respondent No. 1 had been carrying on business of soap in the name of style of Ashoka Jain Industry. The landlord filed an application under Section 14 of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act (hereinafter referred to as the Rent Act) for eviction of respondent No. 1 and his sub-tenant respondent No. 2 Mahavir Gram Udyog Samiti, a society registered under the

























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top