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

1994 Supreme(SC) 73

M.K.MUKHERJEE, S.MOHAN
Keshav Kumar Swarup – Appellant
Versus
Flowmore Private LTD. – Respondent


Advocates:
AMBRISH KUMAR, ANANT PALLI, G.L.SANGHI, H.K.PURI, HARISH N.SLAVE, M.V.GOSWAMY, MAHESH AGRAWAL, SHARAD PURI

Judgment

MUKHERJEE, J.- The appellant-landlord filed an application under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 before the Rent Controller seeking eviction of the respondent-tenant (Company) from the premises in question on the ground of bona fide requirement. After obtaining leave to contest the application, the tenant contended, relying upon clause 5 of the deed of lease which reads as under:

"That the lessee shall use the premises for the residence and personal use of Directors and/or their relatives and for the purpose of the Company."

that the premises were let out both for residential as also commercial purposes and the composite purpose of the tenancy took the premises out of the purview of the residential accommodation. The other ground on which the application was resisted was that the claim of the landlord that the premises were required for his own occupation was not a bona fide one. The Controller rejected both the contentions of the tenant and passed an order for eviction. Aggrieved thereby, the tenant filed a revisional application in the Delhi High Court and reiterated both its contentions. The High Court, while affirming the finding recorded by the Cont



















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