Back
K. M. JOSEPH, HRISHIKESH ROY
Shabbir Mohammad Sayed – Appellant
Versus
Noor Jehan Mushter Shaikh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K.M. JOSEPH, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. By the impugned order, the High Court in a revision petition filed by the appellant has upheld the order passed by the Appellate Bench of the Court of Small Causes at Bombay which in turn affirmed the order passed in Execution Application No.386/2016 that is Order dated 16.11.2016, rejecting the application filed by the appellant under Order XXI Rule 97 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The application for recall has been rejected by the order which is also impugned. The first respondent filed a civil suit against respondent Nos.2-4. Respondent Nos.2-4 are, in other words, defendants 1, 2 and 3 in the suit. The claim of the first respondent in the suit was that defendant Nos. 1 and 2 were tenants of the property in question who were ready to transfer their tenancy rights on the agreed consideration of Rs. 85,000/- which was paid to them by the first respondent. The parties are referred to by their status in the Trial Court. The matter was being delayed on the basis of the property being illegally sublet to two persons. The plaintiff is alleged to have contacted the landlord namely defendant No.3. The 3rd defendant transferred tenancy right
It will not be lawful for a tenant to sublet or to give on license whole or any part of premises let to him or to assign or transfer in any other manner his interest therein.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the non-applicability of the 1993 Act and the 2012 Notification to the property transfer dispute, leading to the dismissal of the suit.
The assignment of tenancy rights under the guise of business transfer is unlawful unless it meets specific legal criteria, emphasizing genuine intent to continue the original business.
An unregistered lease deed cannot establish tenancy or enforce property rights, as it violates mandatory registration laws.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, to establish the existence of the oral tenancy and the bonafide requirement o....
The court affirmed that ownership established through tenancy certificates prevails over claims of possession based on unproven agreements or wills, emphasizing the necessity of fulfilling statutory ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
