Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
ASHISH NAITHANI
Kaushalya Bansal – Appellant
Versus
Sharad Kumar Gupta – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. release application for bona fide business need post-partition. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. article 227 interferes only on perversity or error. (Para 2 , 24 , 25) |
| 3. alternatives and speculation negate bona fide requirement. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. landlord judges suitability; no evidence reappreciation. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. authorities examined need, space, alternatives in detail. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. landlord best judge of his requirement. (Para 19) |
| 7. unsuitability of alternatives supports bona fides. (Para 20) |
| 8. genuine future business intention suffices. (Para 21) |
| 9. comparative hardship balanced without perversity. (Para 22 , 23) |
JUDGMENT :
Ashish Naithani, J.
1. The present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been instituted by the Petitioners, who are tenants of a shop situated at Jhanda Chowk, Rishikesh, District Dehradun, assailing the orders passed by the Prescribed Authority and the appellate authority under the provisions of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972.
2. The dispute traces its origin to the filing of a release application by Respondents over the findings recorded by statutory authorities, nor does it substitute its
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....
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 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....
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.
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....
Proceedings for release of building under occupation of tenant - It is well settled that power under Article 227/226 is of judicial superintendence which cannot be used to up-set conclusions of facts....
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 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....
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
