Back
UMESH CHANDRA SHARMA
Ramesh Kumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Virendra Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
UMESH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.
1. Since both the revisions have been preferred by the defendant-tenant and the plaintiffs-landlords, respectively, against the judgment and order dated 22.8.2012 passed by Judge Small Causes Court/Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Hathras. Therefore, both the revisions are being decided by this common judgment.
2. In brief, facts of the case are that Virendra Singh and others are the owner and the landlord of the house in suit in which the opposite party-defendant is a tenant from 1994 @ 1,000/- per month apart from 10% water and house tax.
3. Since the plaintiffs stay out of Hathras for a long time in connection to their job hence their mother Smt. Shanti Devi used to live with minor grand son Raju alias Arvind Kumar. Smt. Shanti Devi died in the year 2001, thereafter plaintiffs are the owner and landlords of the house in question and are entitled to receive the rent. The defendant is a great defaulter in payment of rent and has not paid the rent of the said house since 1.10.1999. When plaintiffs demanded the rent, he preferred false case against the plaintiffs for permanent injunction for unnecessarily harassing the plaintiffs.
4. Plaintiffs
The main legal point established in the judgment is that compliance with the legal provisions regarding rent payment and termination of tenancy is essential, and the court has the discretion to grant....
Validity of termination notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act and determination of mense profits.
Point of law: When the aid of Revisional Court is invoked on the revisional side, it can interfere within the permissible parameters provided in the statute. It goes without saying that if a revision....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of establishing the landlord-tenant relationship and complying with statutory provisions regarding rent payment and termination of tenancy.
The court clarified that a tenant cannot benefit from their own failure to pay stamp duty on an agreement, affirming the validity of the agreement presented by the revisionist.
The validity of a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act is upheld, confirming the landlord's right to evict despite acceptance of rent post-termination.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the provisions of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, specifically regarding tenant holding ov....
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
