Back
PIYUSH AGRAWAL
Sirajuddin Khan – Appellant
Versus
Laxmi Chandra – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Piyush Agrawal, J.
Heard Mr. Krishna Mohan Garg for the petitioner and Mr. Jitendra Pal Singh Chauhan for the respondent.
2. The present petition u/a 227 has been filed against the order dated 18.5.2024 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge / F.T.C., Court No. 2 Bijnor in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 2 of 2023 (Sirajudding Khan v. Laxmi Chandra) by which the application vide paper no. Ga-43 for issuance of a commission, has been rejected.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that respondent has filed an application under Section 21 (1) (a) of UP Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, against the petitioner in the court of Prescribed Authority Najibabad for release of shop in question, which is under the tenancy of the petitioner. After adducing the evidence by the parties, the Prescribed Authority has allowed the release application on 21.12.2022 without considering the material on record. Feeling aggrieved to the said order, the petitioner has filed a Rent Control Appeal No. 2 of 2023. During pendency of the said appeal, the petitioner moved an application for issuance of commission vide paper no. Ga 43, which has been r
A commission cannot be issued for collecting evidence; it is only permissible to clarify ambiguities in existing evidence.
Appellate court in rent release proceedings may re-appreciate evidence as final fact-finder; supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 permits no interference absent perversity, jurisdictional error....
when the petitioner demands the commissioner to verify the lease agreements, it presupposes existence of such documents. If so, after complying with the provisions of Section 65(a) of the Evidence Ac....
The appellate authority exceeded its jurisdiction by deciding issues without remitting to the Prescribed Authority, violating procedural fairness in landlord-tenant disputes.
Point of Law : Court cannot prevent a party from adducing best evidence if such evidence can be gathered with the help of commission.
The burden of proof under Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 is on the tenant to prove availability of vacant rooms with the landlord, and the admissibility of s....
The bona fide need of a landlord for eviction under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings Act is a factual determination that should not be interfered with by the courts, and tenants cannot dictate the m....
Supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 does not permit re-appreciation of evidence or interference with concurrent findings on bona fide need and comparative hardship unless perverse.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of the bonafide need of the landlord and the comparative hardship of the landlord and tenant in deciding a release application ....
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
