Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

31. Ashok Chintaman Juker v. Kishore Pandurang Mantri, (2001) 5 SCC 1: - It was held that when the plaintiff therein was not paying rent separately and was claiming to be paying rent through the tenant impleaded as a party, there was a joint tenancy and his interest was represented by the tenant impleaded in the case. Notice to a joint tenant is a valid notice and a suit impleading only one of them was maintainable.

32. Mohd. Usman v. Mst. Surayya Begum dated 23.7.1990 of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in C.M.(M.) Nos 288/89: While relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of H.C. Pandey v. G.C. Paul, JT 1989 (2) SC 261 it was held that on the death of the original tenant, the tenancy rights devolve on the heirs of the deceased tenant. The incidence of the tenancy are the same as enjoyed by the original tenant. It is a single tenancy that devolves on the heirs and there is no division of the premises or of the rent payable. It was held that even if one of the legal heirs is not a party to the proceedings for eviction filed by the landlord against the legal heirs of the original tenant, the heir who has been left out cannot later on come forward and agitate his or her right in the tenancy. The RC ARC/20/2020 NAINA Digitally signed by NAINA GUPTA M/S KALANIDHI INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD Vs. GUPTA Date: 2024.10.09 16:07:22 +0530 PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA Page no. 18 of 46 tenant who was not a party to the litigation has no right to object to the execution of the decree. This judgment was upheld by the honorable Supreme Court in Mst. Surayya Begum, Etc vs Mohd. Usman And Ors., Etc on 26 April, 1991 1991 SCC (3) 114.