Back
ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL
Sukhwinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
Jit Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. revision petition against eviction order. (Para 1) |
| 2. landlord's necessity is contested. (Para 2 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. evidence of landlord's necessity. (Para 3 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. details of premises and business intentions. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 5. caution in revisional jurisdiction established. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 6. court cannot dictate business location. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 7. revision petition dismissed due to bonafide necessity. (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT
Mr. Anupinder Singh Grewal, J.
The revision petition is directed against the judgments of the Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority whereby the petition preferred by the respondents/landlords for eviction of the petitioner/tenant from the demised premises has been allowed and the appeal thereagainst has been dismissed respectively.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner/tenant submitted that the respondents/landlords could not prove that their requirement was bonafide especially when they are occupying another premises and the petition had been preferred in a malafide manner solely for the purpose of evicting the petitioner who are the lawful occupants of the premises. The respondents/landlords had pleaded that they require the premises for runnin
The requirement of the landlord for eviction must be judged based on the circumstances at the time of filing the petition, and subsequent events do not affect the bonafide need established by the lan....
Bona fide requirement for eviction is determined by the landlord's genuine need, not dictated by tenant's preferences.
The landlord's bonafide requirement for commercial use of residential property is valid if tenants are already using it commercially, and previous dismissals do not bar new petitions based on new evi....
Pre-amendment eviction petitions from non-residential premises maintainable retrospectively due to Supreme Court on Article 14 violation. Landlord's bonafide need for prime own shops upheld despite r....
Landlord's bona fide need for property doesn’t require dire necessity; tenant's livelihood claims must prove attempts for alternative accommodations.
Landlords must substantiate bona fide need for occupancy. Statutory provisions mandate proving availability of alternatives for tenants, with courts constrained in reconsidering factual findings.
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
