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

2017 Supreme(SC) 302

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R. BANUMATHI, MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR, JJ.
AHMAD @ MOHD. AHMAD – APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
MOHD. OSMAN – RESPONDENT(S)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5654/2008
WITH
MEER SATTAR ALI (Dead) by Lrs. – APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
MOHD. OSMAN – RESPONDENT(S)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5655/2008
Decided On : 30-03-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :- Ms. C.K. Sucharita, Advocate.
For the Respondents:- Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Advocate.

IMPORTANT POINT
When landlord established his ownership, jural relationship of landlord and tenant and his bona fide personal requirement of the premises, eviction has to be ordered.

Headnote:Rent laws – Eviction – Landlord establishing his ownership by documentary and oral evidence – Tenants not able to establish their possession of the premises in their own right – Landlord also establishing his bona fide requirement of the premises – Courts below rightly ordering eviction. (Para 8)

       Facts of the case:

       The respondent herein filed Eviction Petition before the Principal Rent Controller, Secunderabad against Ahmad alias Mohd. Ahmad and Eviction Petition before XVIII Junior Civil Judge-Cum-Additional Rent Controller at Secundarabad against Meer Sattar Ali seeking eviction of the tenants/appellants herein.

       Both the eviction petitions were dismissed.

       The orders passed by the Principal Rent Controller, Secunderabad were questioned by the landlord/respondent herein on the file of Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, which came to be allowed. The judgments passed by the Rent Appellate Court were affirmed by the High Court of Judicature.

       Finding of the Court:

       Courts below rightly directed eviction.

       Result: Appeals dismissed.

JUDGMENT

MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR, J.

The judgment and order dated 29.11.2006 passed by the High Court of Judicature Andhra Pradesh, whereby the High Court has dismissed the revision petitions, is assailed before this Court in these appeals.

2. The respondent herein filed Eviction Petition R.C. No.33 of 1997 before the Principal Rent Controller, Secunderabad against Ahmad alias Mohd. Ahmad and Eviction Petition R.C. No.125 of 1997 before XVIII Junior Civil Judge-Cum-Additional Rent Controller at Secundarabad against Meer Sattar Ali seeking eviction of the tenants/appellants herein. Both the eviction petitions were dismissed on the ground that the jural relationship between the parties as landlord and tenants is not established. The Trial Court thus, concluded that there is no question of wilful default in payment of rent by the tenants. Incidentally, it also held that the premises in question are not required for bona fide purpose of the landlord i.e. for additional accommodation. The orders passed by the Principal Rent Controller, Secunderabad were questioned by the landlord/respondent herein in R.A. No.23 of 2001 and R.A. No.232 of 1999 on the file of Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad, which came to be allowed. The judgments passed by the Rent Appellate Court were affirmed by the High Court of Judicature Andhra Pradesh in Civil Revision No.2374 of 2004 and Civil Revision No.2375 of 2004. Hence, the aggrieved tenants are before this Court.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants/tenants, taking us through the material on record, submit that the tenants and the landlord are the encroachers upon the Government property; and thus, the respondent herein is not real landlord and consequently, they are not tenants under him. She further submits that the denial of title by the tenants is bona fide; one encroacher cannot evict another encroacher and, therefore, the orders of the Rent Controller need to be restored by setting aside the judgments of the Rent Appellate Tribunal as well as the High Court.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/landlord argued in support of the concurrent judgments of the Courts below.

4. The entire property bearing Cantonment Municipal No.1-19-1 to 13 (Old Nos. 105 and 106) situated at Guntroop Bazar, Rasoolpura, Secunderabad Cantonment measuring about 3000 sq. yards was purchased by the father of the respondent-landlord under two registered sale deeds in the years 1911 and 1912. Respondent-landlord has filed the registered sale deeds Exhibits P41 and P45 which clearly establish that the entire property of which the demised premises is also a part, the father of the respondent-landlord was the absolute owner. As pointed out by the first appellate court and also the High Court, the above sale deeds and other documents were produced and accepted as documents of title of the landlord in O.S. No. 3292 of 1979 on the file of XI Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad which suit was filed by the landlord and other legal heirs of father of the landlord for evicting one Mumtaz Begum and others who were in illegal occupation of some portions of the said properties. Upon perusal of the title deeds of the property, the said suit, O.S. No.3292 of 1979, came to be decreed in favour of the respondent-landlord. The said judgment was also confirmed in appeal in A.S. No.197 of 1987 by the Additional Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Secunderabad.

5. The ownership of the property including demised premises is also established by the assessment records maintained by the Secunderabad Cantonment Board. The Cantonment's Board letter Exhibit P2 dated 21.12.1983, addressed to the mother of the respondent-landlord, mentions that the house Nos.105 and 106 situated in the locality known as Guntroop Bazar till 1956 which is assigned the new house No.1-19-1 to 13, is situated in the same locality now called Rasoolpura, Secunderabad. The premises No.1-19-1 to 13 situated in Secunderabad stan









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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 Back to top