Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Right to Promotion is Legitimate Expectation; Marriage-Based Transfer Can't Defeat It: Himachal Pradesh High Court
12 Mar 2026
Section 4 Official Secrets Act Presumption and Prima Facie Evidence Bar Bail in Espionage Case: Punjab & Haryana HC
14 Mar 2026
Centre Revokes Wangchuk's NSA Detention Amid SC Challenge
14 Mar 2026
No Interference Allowed in Religious Prayers on Private Premises: Allahabad HC Cites Maranatha Precedent
14 Mar 2026
No Proof of Absolute Ownership by Mizo Chiefs Bars Fundamental Rights Claim Under Article 31: Supreme Court
14 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Mohd. Umar, S/o. Late Shri Natthu Ji – Appellant
Versus
Altaf Hussain, S/o. Shri Mohd. Hussain – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred seeking the following reliefs:
(i) quash the impugned judgment and certificate dated 28.06.2022 (Annexure-8) passed by the Learned Appellate Rent Tribunal, Jodhpur in Rent Appeal No. 61/2019 (NCV No. 61/2019)
(ii) the judgment and certificate dated 13.08.2019 (Annexure-6) passed by the learned Rent Tribunal, Jodhpur in original application no. 38/2012 (Old No. 51/2005) be restored back throughout; and
(iii) the original eviction petition filed by the respondents against the petitioners under the provisions of Section 9 of the Rent Control Act, 2001 may be dismissed with costs throughout; and
(iv) any other appropriate relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of appearing before the tribunal and rebutting claims to contest eviction proceedings.
The landlord and tenant relationship is established when rent is received, and the question of ownership is not required to be determined in eviction cases under the Act of 2001.
The court established that a valid tenant-landlord relationship must be evidenced by clear documentation and payment history, which was lacking in this case.
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 ....
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
Listen Article