Back
SANDEEP SHARMA
Sunil Mehta – Appellant
Versus
A. D. Kashyap – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sandeep Sharma, J.
Instant revision petition filed under Section 24(4) of the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act 1987, lays challenge to judgment dated 4.09.2015 passed by learned Appellate Authority(III) Shimla, District Shimla, H.P.,(prescribed under the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act), in Rent Appeal RBT No.14-S/13(b) of 2013, reversing the order dated 26.11.2012 passed by learned Rent Controller, Court No.5, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, in case No.1-2 of 2007, whereby petition for eviction of the respondent-tenant, preferred by the petitioner-landlord from the demise premises was allowed.
2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record are that the petitioner-landlord (for short landlord) filed a petition under Section 14 of the Rent Control Act,1984 (for short Act) for eviction of respondent No.1 (for short ‘tenant’) on the grounds of non-payment of rent and bonafide requirement. Landlord sought eviction of the tenant from the demise premises consisting of two rooms, kitchen with common bath, latrine, balcony and common entrance in the ground floor of Mehta Niwas, Fingask Estate, Shimla3. Landlord claimed that initially monthly rent of the premises was Rs.700/- in th
Section 14 of H.P. Urban Rent Control Act clearly reveals that grounds for landlord for eviction, but he/she is under obligation to establish on record that grounds sought to be raised for eviction a....
Bona fide personal need persists till final decree despite subsequent vacation/re-letting of other units in multi-storied building; landlord chooses age-suited premises, tenant cannot dictate; subseq....
Section 25 empowers the Rent Controller to summon and enforce the attendance of witnesses and to compel the production of evidence as the Court is empowered under CPC.
Court affirmed that revising authority cannot re-evaluate factual findings unless they are grossly erroneous or perverse, affirming the standards of evidence interpretation in eviction cases.
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 ....
The landlord-tenant relationship, the landlord's bona fide need, and the rent amount were key legal principles established in the judgment.
Eviction petitions under the Delhi Rent Control Act can be maintainable even for partial tenancies, provided the landlord establishes genuine need, which courts prioritize over tenant claims of alter....
The landlord's bona fide requirement for eviction is established even if he owns other properties, and the tenant cannot dictate the landlord's use of his properties.
Deposit of rent arrears after 30 days of eviction order, even pursuant to High Court interim direction, does not invoke 3rd proviso to Section 14(2)(i) protecting tenant from eviction; strict statuto....
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
