Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL
Anil Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Ramraj – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Gulrez Khan, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Shailesh Pandey, learned counsel for respondent no. 1 and Sri R.C. Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent no. 3.
2. This writ petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India assails the order dated 21.04.2025 passed in S.C.C. Suit No. 5 of 1993 and order dated 14.08.2025 passed by Additional District Judge, 4, Chandausi, Sambhal in S.C.C. Revision No. 28 of 2013.
3. The case in brief is that petitioner along with respondent no. 5 had entered into an agreement with one Ashok Raj, the landlord on 13.08.1986. Shops on ground floor, first floor and second floor were constructed with investment being made by petitioner-tenant. Shop at first floor and second floor were let out to tenant and rent agreed was Rs.400/- which was to be deducted from the cost incurred in construction and renovation. On 11.07.1990, another agreement was executed between the landlord and tenant in respect of a shop situated on ground floor at monthly rent of Rs.1,000/-. As there was default in payment of rent, respondent-landlord gave notice under Section 106 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (
Unregistered tenancy agreements exceeding one year are inadmissible in evidence; valid notice of eviction is established if default in rent payment is proven.
The court affirmed the revisional court's findings on landlord-tenant relationships and notice validity, emphasizing statutory interpretation and jurisdictional limits under the Provincial Small Caus....
The main legal point established in the given judgment is that the relationship between landlord and tenant must be proved, the rate of rent must be established, and the absence of a registered subsi....
Unregistered lease agreements cannot create tenancy rights exceeding one year under the Transfer of Property Act, leading to a month-to-month tenancy requiring valid notice for termination.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that non-registration of a rent agreement does not make it void or inadmissible in evidence under the Punjab Rent Act, 1995.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an unregistered lease deed for a period not exceeding 11 months is admissible in evidence, and a tenant is estopped from challenging the title....
Valid service of notice under S.106 of the Transfer of Property Act confirmed despite additional numbering; mere mention of a second address does not invalidate notice.
The court affirmed the validity of the notice terminating tenancy and the admissibility of the lease agreement as secondary evidence, emphasizing the defendants' failure to contest the claims.
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
