A.K.SIKRI, N.V.RAMANA
RAJENDER BANSAL – Appellant
Versus
BHURU (D) THR. LRS. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
A.K. Sikri, J.
The appellants in this appeal are the landlords who had filed suit for eviction of the respondents herein, their tenants. Suit was filed in the Civil Court. The premises in-question were outside the ambit of rent legislation. It is because of this reason that civil suit for possession/ejectment was filed. However, during the pendency of the suit and before it could be finally decided, the area in question was brought within the sweep of rent legislations by requisite notifications. The effect of such coverage was to give protective umbrella to the tenants. As a fortiorari, the landlord can now evict the tenant only by taking recourse to the rent legislation, that too, by filing the petition for eviction under the Rent Act before the Rent Controller/Tribunal constituted under the said Acts. Civil Court ceases to have jurisdiction over the matter insofar as eviction/ejectment of tenant is concerned.
In this backdrop, the question that has arisen for consideration is as to whether the Civil Court would cease to have jurisdiction to try the suit of eviction if the suit property came under notified area during pendency of the suit? To put it differently, the questio
Ramesh Chandra v. III Addl. Distt. Judge
Nand Kishore Marwah v. Samundri Devi
Harijeet Kaur v. Sarabjit Kaur
Mani Subrat Jain v. Raja Ram Vohra
Lakshmi Narayan Guin v. Niranjan Modak
Atma Ram Mittal v. Ishwar Singh Punia
Vineet Kumar v. Mangal Sain Wadhera
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.