Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
ASHISH NAITHANI
Nandan Singh – Appellant
Versus
Sarvesh Kumar Mittal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of eviction under rent control. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. article 227 supervisory jurisdiction limited to perversity. (Para 5 , 15) |
| 3. petitioner's challenge to bona fide need, hardship, title. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. respondent defends need, concurrent findings, no title dispute. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. bona fide need proven; alternatives do not negate. (Para 16 , 17) |
| 6. hardship balances favour landlord over long tenancy. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 7. rent control not for title adjudication; estoppel applies. (Para 20) |
| 8. additional evidence rejection discretionary, no injustice. (Para 21) |
| 9. no perversity; writ petition dismissed without costs. (Para 22) |
JUDGMENT :
ASHISH NAITHANI, J.
1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the Petitioner, who is a long-standing tenant of the premises in question, assailing the judgment and order dated 14.12.2020 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ramnagar, District Nainital in Rent Control Appeal No. 13 of 2018, as well as the judgment and order dated 27.11.2018 passed by the learned Prescribed Authority / Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ramnagar in Rent Co
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.
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....
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....
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....
The landlord is the best judge of his requirement and the tenant cannot dictate the landlord as to how and in what manner he should live. The availability of other vacant shops, as pleaded by the ten....
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....
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
