Back
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
SHARAD KUMAR SHARMA
Indian Oil Corporation Limited – Appellant
Versus
Mamta Goel – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
This is a defendant’s Second Appeal, which has been preferred, being aggrieved against the judgment and decree dated 18.02.2021, as has been rendered by the Court of Additional District Judge, 3rd, Dehradun, in Civil Appeal No. 31 of 2017, Indian Oil Corporation Limited Vs. Shri Pankaj Gupta and others, by virtue of which, the Appeal which was preferred by the defendant/appellant, was dismissed and, as a consequence thereto, it has affirmed the judgment and decree dated 31st May, 2007, which was rendered by the Court of learned 2nd Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dehradun, in Suit No. 155 of 2000, Pankaj Gupta and others Vs. I.B.P. Co. Ltd.
2. Brief facts of the case are, that the plaintiff/respondents, herein, on 4th April, 2000, had instituted a Regular Civil Suit, before the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dehradun, praying for the grant of decree of eviction of the defendant/appellant and all their other agents, allies and person attached to their office, from the Suit land, which was described in the schedule of the property of the plaint. The actual possession of which was said to be delivered by the plaintiff/respondent, and
The expiration of a fixed term tenancy and the failure to prove the right of construction led to the defendant's status as a tenant at sufferance, overriding the claimed immunity from eviction under ....
Point of law: The effect of Order XLI Rule 27(1)(b) CPC was considered in recording such observations. It was not an instance with reference to application of Order XLI Rule 27(1)(aa) CPC. This claus....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, to establish the existence of the oral tenancy and the bonafide requirement o....
The interpretation of 'first hearing' under Section 20(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Building Act is critical in determining tenant rights, emphasizing the need for evidence regarding the nature of p....
The burden of proof to establish subtenancy is on the landlord, and the court may affirm an eviction decree if the landlord successfully demonstrates the creation of subtenancy.
PP Act prevails over state rent acts for evicting unauthorized occupants from public premises, including pre-existing tenancies post-acquisition; unauthorized assignment, decades-long rent default, a....
The court affirmed that eviction proceedings under the Transfer of Property Act remain valid despite subsequent enactments, provided they were initiated before the new law's applicability.
A second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure must involve substantial questions of law, and unregistered tenancy agreements cannot establish non-evictable rights.
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
