IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATYEN VAIDYA
Rajinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
Rajesh Madan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Satyen Vaidya, J.
The instant petition has been filed against order dated 09.06.2022, passed by learned Rent Controller, Shimla, in Case No. CIS 4 of 2022, whereby the objections of the petitioner herein under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, “the Code”) along with application under Order 14 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code have been dismissed.
2. The facts necessary for adjudication of this petition are as under:
(i) Respondent No.1 Rajesh Madan is the landlord in respect of residential premises known as House No. 82/3 Top Floor, Ganj Road, Shimla (hereinafter referred to as “the premises”). The premises was under the tenancy of Gian Singh even before the purchase of premises by the landlord.
(ii) Gian Singh died and was survived by his wife Balwant Kaur, Sons Rajinder Singh, Gurbachan Singh and Joginder Singh (now deceased).
(iii) After death of Gian Singh, the landlord filed a petition under Section 14 of H.P. Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 (for short, “the Act”) for eviction from the premises against Balwant Kaur on the grounds firstly, that the building had become unfit and unsafe for human habitation and secondly, the landlord required the premises bonafide f
All legal heirs of a deceased tenant inherit tenancy rights as joint tenants, making eviction against one binding on all.
The right to re-entry for tenants post-eviction is contingent upon mutual agreement and completion of rebuilding, not an absolute right.
The substantive right conferred by Section 14(3)(c) of the Act has prospective effect only from the date the amendment was incorporated in the statute.
The appellate court must provide detailed reasoning for its decisions, reflecting a conscious application of mind to all issues, while the revisional jurisdiction does not allow for a re-hearing of f....
Tenancy rights under the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act do not devolve to heirs unless specified, resulting in the eviction of non-applicants who claimed tenancy rights after the death of th....
The court affirmed the eviction of tenants based on the landlord's bona fide requirement for reconstruction of a dilapidated building, emphasizing the limited scope of revisional jurisdiction.
The heritable rights of the statutory tenant are governed by the provisions of Section 2(l) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, and the rights in the tenanted property can only flow in favor of heirs as p....
The court established that tenancy rights under the 1956 Act were not extinguished by the 1997 Act, emphasizing the necessity of clear admissions for eviction under CPC.
The mandatory nature of Section 14(2) of the DRC act and the landlord's remedy to file a civil suit for possession when the tenant denies the landlord-tenant relationship.
The rights of statutory tenants under the DRC Act are confined to specific heirs designated by law, preventing broader claims to tenancy inheritance.
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.