Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
ASHISH NAITHANI
Sachin – Appellant
Versus
Sagar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ASHISH NAITHANI, J.
1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the judgment and order dated 14.12.2012 passed by the learned District Judge, Dehradun in Rent Control Appeal No. 81 of 2012, whereby the appellate court interfered with and set aside the order dated 08.11.2011 passed by the Prescribed Authority, Dehradun in P.A. Case No. 21 of 2008 under the provisions of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972.
2. By means of the present petition, the petitioners seek judicial scrutiny of the appellate order reversing the release of accommodation earlier granted in their favour by the Prescribed Authority.
3. The dispute in the present case pertains to a residential accommodation bearing property No. 11-A, also known as 11/2, situated at Chukkuwala, Dehradun, which is owned by the petitioners. The said accommodation was originally under the tenancy of Smt. Durga Devi.
4. Smt. Durga Devi expired on 27.03.2008 leaving behind her legal heirs. After her death, the petitioners instituted a release application under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 seeking release of the
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....
Appellate court cannot re-appreciate evidence or substitute its view in rent release proceedings unless Prescribed Authority's findings perverse; supervisory jurisdiction under Art.227 corrects juris....
High Court under Article 227 set aside appellate reversal of rent control eviction order, holding it perverse for reappreciating evidence on landlord's bona fide ground floor shop need post-retiremen....
The court affirmed that the tenant's failure to contest the landlord's bona fide need led to an adverse inference, emphasizing the limited scope of judicial review under Article 227.
The bona fide need of a landlord to evict tenants for an adult family member's independent business cannot be denied based solely on tenant longevity; evidence of genuine necessity must be considered....
Under Article 227, supervisory jurisdiction limits interference with concurrent findings on bona fide need and comparative hardship unless perverse or jurisdictional error; landlord best judge of sui....
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
