Back
INDERJEET SINGH
Mohammed Jakir – Appellant
Versus
Mohammed Naushad – Respondent
ORDER
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner (hereinafter to be referred as ’tenant’) against the judgment & decree dated 19.03.2021 passed by the Appellate Rent Tribunal, Jaipur Metropolitan-I in Appeal No.43/2020 as well as against the judgment & decree of eviction dated 10.12.2019 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Jaipur in Eviction Application No.463/2006 (CIS-1069/2014).
2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondents (hereinafter to be referred as ’landlords’) filed an application under Section 9 of the Rent Control Act, 2001 (hereinafter to be referred as the ’Act, 2001’) before the Rent Tribunal for eviction of the tenant on the grounds of default in making payment of rent, personal & bonafide necessity of the landlords, nuisance and change of use by the tenant of the disputed shop for the purpose it was let out. The tenant filed reply to the eviction application and denied the averments made in the eviction application. The landlords also filed rejoinder to the reply. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the learned Rent Tribunal framed as many as five issues for consideration which read as under :-
3. The landlords in support of their case examined PW
The court emphasized the importance of upholding findings of fact arrived at by the lower tribunals and the landlord's right to choose the best place for doing business.
The landlord's bona fide need at the time of filing the suit continues even after the sale of the property to a third party during the pendency of the proceedings.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that once a landlord establishes reasonable and bonafide necessity for the accommodation, it cannot be rejected on the premise that the person d....
Point of Law : Tenant fails to furnish undertaking to above effect, respondent-landlady would be entitled to get judgment/decree of eviction executed forthwith in accordance with law.
The court established that a second eviction application is permissible if the first was not decided on merits, emphasizing the need for a practical approach to bona fide requirements.
The court emphasized that a landlord’s bona fide necessity for eviction must be upheld if substantiated by evidence, and the scope of review under Article 227 is limited to supervisory jurisdiction, ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of appearing before the tribunal and rebutting claims to contest eviction proceedings.
Tenants can be evicted for using premises inconsistently with tenancy purpose, supported by sufficient evidence from the landlord.
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
