Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
RAVI NATH TILHARI
Akella Surya Kumari – Appellant
Versus
Nidavolu Thammiraju – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAVI NATH TILHARI, J.
1. Heard Sri A. Radha Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner. None appeared for the respondent.
I. Facts :
2. This civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner/defendant challenging the order dated 08.07.2024, passed in R.C.C.No.4 of 2020 (in short, R.C.C), pending in the court of Rent Controller-cum-IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, (learned Court) rejecting I.A.No.833 of 2024 filed by the petitioner under Order XIV Rule 1 Code of Civil Procedure (for short, C.P.C) read with Section 151 C.P.C, to decide land lord and tenant relationship and the jurisdiction of the Court as a preliminary issue as the Rent Court/Rent Tribunal under the Andhra Pradesh/Telangana Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (for short, “the Act, 1960”) was not constituted.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the title of the C.R.P as also the impugned order, it is wrongly mentioned that the petitioner is the plaintiff and the respondent is the defendant. The correct fact is that the petitioner is the defendant and the respondent is the plaintiff in the Rent Control Ca
The court affirmed that jurisdiction issues can only be decided by established forums, and changes involving procedural law are retrospective, impacting pending actions unless specified otherwise.
: Court can always lift such veil and see real purpose of filing of suit. Section 18 of the Rent Control Act of 2001 admittedly bars the jurisdiction of any Civil Court in the matters relating to ten....
The Rent Court has comprehensive jurisdiction over claims relating to both recovery of possession and injunctions in landlord-tenant disputes under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act.
The court established that disputes between landlords and tenants must be resolved by the Rent Tribunal, not civil courts, as per Section 18 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001.
(1) Ouster of jurisdiction of Civil Court is not readily inferred.(2) If a landlord-tenant relationship is disputed, despite exclusive jurisdiction conferred on Revenue Court, to even Order eviction ....
The existence of a landlord-tenant relationship can be disputed in civil courts, even with Section 25's jurisdiction exclusion, allowing tenants to contest eviction orders when legitimacy is asserted....
The mandatory nature of Section 14(2) of the DRC act and the landlord's remedy to file a civil suit for possession when the tenant denies the landlord-tenant relationship.
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
