Back
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
Jan Alam (deceased) Thr Lrs. – Appellant
Versus
Rekha – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J. The present revision petition has been filed by the Petitioner (`tenant') assailing the eviction order dated 06.03.2021 (`impugned eviction order'), passed by the Additional Rent Controller, Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (`Trial Court'), in ARC No. 77991/16, wherein post-trial, the eviction order has been passed in favour of the Respondent, landlady, in the eviction petition filed by her under Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (`DRC Act').
2. In this matter the impugned eviction order has been executed and the possession of the tenanted premises i.e., One room in Flat No. E-15, third floor, DDA Flats, Turkman Gate, Delhi (`tenanted premises') has been recovered by the Respondent, as recorded in the order dated 15.11.2021. In these circumstances, it was submitted by the Respondent that nothing survives for consideration in the matter, in view of the decision of Supreme Court in N.C. Daga v. Inder Mohan Singh Rana, (2003) 1 SCC 453. However, learned counsel for the Petitioner, tenant, is seeking adjudication of the present petition on merits and states that he has instructions from the Petitioner No.1, who is present in
The Trial Court had the jurisdiction to adjudicate the claim of the Petitioners with respect to alleged ownership of the tenanted premises on the basis of unregistered Will, and the non-filing of a p....
Tenancy and Land laws - Eviction - There is nothing that petitioners have been able to bring forth to indicate that finding has been arrived at by a misreading of facts or omitting relevant evidence ....
A tenant cannot dispute the title of the landlord, and genuine need for premises must be established without alternative accommodation for eviction to be warranted. Adverse possession claims require ....
Tenants cannot challenge the landlord's title in eviction proceedings; only the landlord-tenant relationship is relevant under the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1968, specifically Section 14(1)(a) and (j) to determine the existence of the ....
The legal point established is that the landlord retains ownership rights until physical possession is taken over by the government, and the burden is on the tenant to show how they came into possess....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the tenant to establish a prima facie case at the stage of seeking leave to contest under Section 25B of the Delhi Rent Control....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle of estoppel, where the tenant's acceptance of the landlord's ownership through various actions and documents led to the dismissal of ....
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
