Back
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, SANJEEV NARULA
Sunil Kumar Jain – Appellant
Versus
Registrar General, Delhi High Court – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J. - The five petitioners, have filed this petition impugning the communication dated 1st October, 2019 of this Court, rejecting the representation dated 2nd May, 2018 made by the petitioners on the Administrative side of this Court. It is the case of the petitioners, that (i) they are tenants in different shops in the city of Delhi; (ii) different Rent Control legislations, viz. New Delhi House Rent Control Order 1939, Delhi Rent Control Ordinance 1944, Delhi and Ajmer-Marwara Rent Control Act 1947, Delhi and Ajmer Rent Control Act 1952 and Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (the Act) have been applicable to Delhi from time to time; (iii) Section 14(1)(e) of the Act afforded to the landlords a right to evict the tenant on the ground of requirement of the premises for the residence of himself/herself and their dependant family members; (iv) vide amendment of the year 1976 to the Act, Section 25B was incorporated in the Act, prescribing summary procedure for decision of the petitions for eviction on the ground under Section 14(1)(e) of the Act; (v) in the debate in the Parliament preceding the aforesaid amendment of the year 1976, the then Minister of State in
The High Court reaffirmed that summary eviction procedures apply to both residential and commercial premises under the Delhi Rent Control Act, based on legislative intent and precedent case law.
A classification between residential and commercial buildings in a rent control law is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India if there is no nexus between the classificati....
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.
Eviction of tenant – Rent Controller can grant leave to defend if affidavit filed by tenant discloses such facts as would disentitle landlord from obtaining an Order for Recovery of Possession.
The landlord's bona fide requirement should not be doubted, and the tenant must make out a case showing that the landlord would be disentitled from obtaining an eviction order.
The court emphasized the landlord's right to eviction through summary proceedings and the tenant's obligation to provide evidence to support claims at the stage of seeking leave to contest.
The landlord's need for the premises for setting up a Management-cum-Higher Education Institute for a family member dependent on him fell within the parameters of Section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act, and....
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
