SUDESH BANSAL
Habibuddin S/o Shri Niyamat Khan – Appellant
Versus
Haricharan S/o Srilal R/o Choudhary Pada, Karauli Raj. (Died) – Respondent
Judgment
1. With the consent of learned counsel for both parties, the second appeal itself has been heard on merits.
2. This second appeal has been filed by appellant-defendant-tenant (hereafter referred 'tenant') against the judgment and decree dated 15.02.2005 passed by District Judge, Karouli whereby the appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed and upheld the judgment dated 29.03.2001 in suit No.35/1998 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Karauli whereby the suit of eviction was decree against the tenant.
3. The rented premise is a shop measuring 5 X 7 sq. feet situated at Phoota Kot, Mohalla Dholikhar, Karauli which is in tenancy of the appellant since 1964 at the rate of Rs.10/- per month. The dispute of eviction is pending since 1969. In the first eviction suit No.68/1969, the appellant-tenant was declared defaulter in payment of rent, however, he was granted benefit of first default. Thereafter, it appears that tenant committed second default for the period 1.02.1995 to 31.03.1998 and on such default, the second civil suit for eviction No.35/1998 was filed, which has been decreed by the trial court on the ground of second default vide judgment dated 29.03.2001. The judgment of tr
The court reinforced that concurrent findings of fact by lower courts are binding unless proven erroneous, particularly in eviction cases under the Rent Control Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the benefit of first default accorded to a tenant under the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 should be upheld unles....
The court upheld the landlord's right to evict the tenant based on the default in rent payment and the landlord's bona fide need for the shop, as provided under the Rent Act.
The court emphasized the importance of bona fide necessity in eviction cases and highlighted the lack of bona fides in pursuing frivolous litigation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the benefit of first default in payment of rent by a deceased tenant extends to the heirs, and mere enhancement of rent without altering other....
The court established that eviction can be granted based on bona fide necessity when the tenant's claim of occupying multiple rooms is not substantiated by evidence.
Concurrent findings of fact by lower courts are upheld unless proven to be perverse or legally flawed.
The court established that consistent non-payment of rent during proceedings justifies eviction under the UP Rent Act.
A tenant must regularly pay rent to retain occupancy; eviction can be granted even for a single default in payment.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove bonafide and reasonable necessity for eviction under Section 13 of the Rajasthan Premise (Control of rent and Eviction)....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.