Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.27 seconds)The Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958
Associated Hotels Of India Ltd., Delhi vs S. B. Sardar Ranjit Singh on 7 December, 1967
(26). Similarly, in another case of Associated Hotels of
India Ltd., Delhi v. S.B. Sardar Ranjit Singh (1968) 2 SCR 548,
the Hon'ble Apex Court observed as under:
"When eviction is sought on the ground
of subletting, the onus to prove subletting is on the
landlord. If the landlord primafacie shows that the
occupant, who was is in exclusive possession of the
premises let out for valuable consideration, it would
then be for the tenant to rebut the evidence."
(27). In the light of above discussion, I hold that the
petitioner has successfully established his case for eviction
U/Sec. 14 (1) (b) of D.R.C. Act against the respondents. Hence,
an eviction order is passed U/Sec.
Helper Girdhiarbhai vs Saiyed Mohmad Mirasaheb Kadri And ... on 6 May, 1987
Helper
Girdharbhai v. Saiyed Mohmad Mirasaheb Kadri & others
E no. 1079/2006 Page 12/ 19
Kanwalkant v. Montegomery & ors.
Gopal Saran vs Satyanarayana on 20 February, 1989
Gopal Saran v.
Satyanarayana (1989) 3 SCC 56.
Parvinder Singh vs Renu Gautam & Ors on 22 April, 2004
In the case of Parvinder Singh v. Renu Gautam
(2004) 4 SCC 7941 it was held that
"If the tenant is actively associated
with the partnership business and retains the use
and control over the tenancy premises with him,
E no. 1079/2006 Page 17/ 19
Kanwalkant v. Montegomery & ors.
K.C. Agrawal vs Hardip Singh on 9 December, 2004
(13). Having heard the arguments on this point, I find no
strength in the plea of respondent as firstly, the issue of
ownership is not to be decided in these eviction proceedings.
Secondly, Sh. Gulshan Rai, coowner of the portion of the
premises in dispute impleaded as respondent no. 4 in the array of
the parties, has precisely admitted the facts of the eviction
petition to be correct and also prayed for an eviction order in
favour of the petitioner. Thirdly, as per settled law, a coowner is
well entitled to maintain an eviction petition against the tenant.
On this, I am supported by the case law of K.C. Agarwal v.
Hardip Singh 2005(1)AD (Delhi) 587; wherein it was held that
"coowner is owner and deemed to be
landlord for the purpose of D.R.C. Act."
The Slum Areas (Improvement And Clearance) Act, 1956
Celina Coelho Pereira & Ors vs Ulhas Mahabaleshwar Kholkar & Ors on 30 October, 2009
Overall control of the suit premises and supervision of the
business activities is within the same family with no stranger
being introduced therein. On this point, learned counsel for
respondent sought reliance upon the following cases viz. (i).
Celina Coelho Pereira & Ors. v. Ulhas Mahabaleshwar Kholkar
& Ors. 2009 AIR SCW 7177, (ii).
Krishnawati vs Hans Raj on 29 November, 1973
Smt. Krishnawati v. Hans Raj (1974) 1 SCC 280, (iv).
1