Back
GIRISH KATHPALIA
Sukhvinder Kumar Bhardwaj – Appellant
Versus
Vinita – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
GIRISH KATHPALIA, J.
1. The appellant tenant has assailed order dated 03.08.2024 of the learned Trial Court whereby, after dismissing the application of the appellant under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, the learned Trial Court invoked suo motu powers under Order XII Rule 6 CPC and passed preliminary decree of restoration of possession of the subject property in favour of the present respondent landlord and after framing issues related to recovery of arrears of rent and mesne profits, posted the matter for trial. Having heard learned counsel for appellant and having perused the record, in my considered view it is not a fit case to even issue notice of the appeal to the respondent/landlord.
2. Briefly stated, circumstances relevant for present purposes are as follows. The present respondent being sole and absolute owner of the subject property, which is a ground floor DDA MIG Flat bearing no. AG-1/20A, Vikas Puri, New Delhi, agreed to induct the appellant as a tenant in the subject property for residential purposes at a monthly rent of Rs. 20,000/-. A rent agreement dated 20.01.2021 was executed between the parties and after expiry of the same with efflux of time, another rent agree
The court affirmed that a Trial Court can invoke suo motu powers under Order XII Rule 6 CPC without a formal application, especially when the tenancy is residential and admissions are clear.
Landlord can obtain possession of premises upon clear admissions about tenancy relations and formal lease termination, regardless of tenant's claims of extensions based on rent acceptance.
A plaint must be read meaningfully to determine if it discloses a cause of action; issues of jurisdiction and limitation are to be resolved at trial.
Admissions regarding tenancy and service of quit notice are critical for recovery of possession under Order XII Rule 6 CPC.
Possession can be decreed under Order XII Rule 6 CPC when there is an admission of tenancy, despite disputes over rent or security. Lack of evidence supporting claims weakens the tenant's position.
The determination of whether premises qualify as a commercial dispute hinges on actual use, not merely the designation of the property as residential.
If tenants fail to vacate said premises on expiry of tenancy period, tenants shall pay a sum of Rs.3,000/- per day towards penalty alongwith monthly rent to landladies.
The denial of the relationship of landlord and tenant by the defendant and its claim of ownership in respect of the suit property did not bar the suit from being maintainable before the civil court.
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.
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
