Back
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
GOPALKRISHNA JHA – Appellant
Versus
SHRI 108 PUJYAPAD ADVET PANCH PARMESHWAR PANCHAYATI AKHARA – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ashish Naithani, J.
1. These two writ petitions, arising out of connected Small Cause Court proceedings between the same parties and involving substantially identical questions of law and fact, are being decided together. Both petitions challenge the judgments and decrees passed by the trial court in separate SCC suits relating to the Petitioners’ tenancy over small shop premises at Kankhal, Haridwar, as well as the dismissal of the corresponding revisions by the learned II Additional District Judge, Haridwar, by orders dated 01.09.2023.
2. Since the core issue in both matters concerns the applicability of Section 2(1)(bb) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 and the effect of an earlier adjudication dated 01.12.2014 determining the Respondent-ashram’s legal character, a common judgment is warranted.
3. In WPMS 3627 of 2023, the challenge is to the decree dated 20.12.2018 in S.C.C. Suit No. 8 of 2015, affirmed on 01.09.2023 in S.C.C. Revision No. 3 of 2019 by the II Additional District Judge, Haridwar.
4. In WPMS 3634 of 2023, the challenge is to the decree dated 20.12.2018 in S.C.C. Suit No. 20 of 2014, affirmed on 01.09.2023 in S.C.C. Revision No. 2 of 2019 by the II Additional D
The court affirmed that findings of legal character regarding institutions must adhere to established court rulings and cannot be ignored in summary proceedings.
The court upheld the trial court's finding that the landlord was a charitable trust exempt from eviction laws, affirming that previous judgments establishing legal character are relevant.
Inconsistent findings holding rent control Act applicable and tenancy not validly terminated preclude eviction decree outside statutory framework; such jurisdictional errors warrant Article 227 super....
The court affirmed that the society is a public charitable institution exempt from the U.P. Urban Buildings Act, and upheld the Secretary's authority to litigate on behalf of the society.
The jurisdiction to adjudicate eviction cases for authorized tenants remains valid under the Rent Act even with the enactment of benefitting laws for landlords.
A suit under Section 92 C.P.C. must be filed in the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction, not in a Civil Judge's Court, and the absence of a trust-deed does not prevent admission.
A tenant cannot deny the landlord's title once the landlord-tenant relationship is established; the tenant must prove lawful deposit of owed rent, and properties used for charitable purposes are exem....
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
