Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes State Election Commission's Cancellation of Panchayat Elections in Punjab J&K High Court Quashes FIR Against Bajaj Allianz, Asserts Insurance Dispute Shouldn’t Be Criminalized Sole Eyewitness's Testimony Insufficient to Sustain Murder Conviction: Madras High Court Acquits Three Accused in Murder Case Presumption of Innocence is Strengthened in Acquittal Cases; Appellate Courts Must Respect Trial Court Findings Unless Clearly Perverse: Delhi High Court NDPS | Physical or Virtual Presence of Accused is Mandatory for Extension of Detention Beyond 180 Days: Andhra Pradesh HC Bombay High Court Quashes Suspension of Welfare Benefits for Construction Workers Due to Model Code of Conduct Section 131 of Electricity Act Does Not Mandate Finalized Transfer Scheme Before Bidding: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Privatization of UT Chandigarh Electricity Department Revenue Authorities Must Safeguard State Property, Not Indulge in Land Scams: Madhya Pradesh High Court Proposed Amendment Clarifies, Not Changes, Cause of Action: High Court of Jharkhand emphasizing the necessity of amendment for determining real questions in controversy. EWS Candidates Selected on Merit Should Not Be Counted Towards Reserved Quota: P&H High Court Finance Act 2022 Amendments Upheld: Supreme Court Validates Retrospective Customs Authority for DRI Mere Breach Of Contract Does Not Constitute A Criminal Offense Unless Fraudulent Intent Exists From The Start: Delhi High Court Anticipatory Bail Not Intended As A Shield To Avoid Lawful Proceedings In Cases Of Serious Crimes: Allahabad High Court Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail in Light of Prolonged Detention and Delays in Trial U/S 480 BNSS Provision Bombay High Court Orders Disclosure of Candidates' Marks in Public Recruitment Process: Promotes Transparency under RTI Act Maintenance | Father's Duty to Support Daughters Until Self-Sufficiency or Marriage: Karnataka High Court Designation of Arbitration 'Venue' as 'Seat' Confers Exclusive Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Rules in Dubai Arbitration Case Corporate Veil Shields Company Assets from Partition as Joint Family Property: Madras High Court Principal Employers Liable for ESI Contributions for Contract Workers, But Assessments Must Be Fair and Account for Eligibility: Kerala High Court Government Entities Must be Treated Equally to Private Parties in Arbitration Proceedings: Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Resumption of Disciplinary Inquiry Against Storekeeper in Ration Misappropriation Case

Absence of Documentary Evidence, A Hurdle in Proving Landlord-Tenant Relationship – Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent ruling, the High Court of Delhi, led by Hon’ble Ms. Justice Shalinder Kaur, dismissed a petition involving a contentious landlord-tenant dispute, emphasizing the crucial need for concrete evidence in establishing such relationships. The judgment highlights the challenges faced in applying Order XV-A CPC when a landlord-tenant relationship is denied and lacks supportive documentation.

The case hinged on the application of Order XV-A CPC in a scenario where the respondent denies a landlord-tenant relationship. This order typically mandates a tenant to deposit rent and mesne profits during the pendency of an eviction suit. The Court delved into the intricacies of proving a landlord-tenant relationship and the consequent application of Order XV-A.

Manjeet Singh Kohli, the petitioner, claimed to be the owner of a property from which he sought eviction of the respondents, along with recovery of unpaid rent and damages. The respondents, on the other hand, denied any such relationship and contested the claim. Kohli’s petition primarily revolved around the enforcement of Order XV-A CPC, given the alleged non-payment of rent since February 2016.

Justice Kaur’s judgment meticulously assessed the application of Order XV-A CPC. It underscored the provision’s objective as a tool to ensure landlords are not deprived of rent or mesne profits due to prolonged litigation. However, the court emphasized that the mere denial of a landlord-tenant relationship does not exempt a tenant from the obligation to deposit rent. Yet, in this case, the absence of substantial evidence from Kohli to establish such a relationship led to the decision in favor of the respondents.

“Denial of title…and denial of relationship of landlord and tenant, simplicitor does not and cannot absolve the lessee/tenant to deposit the due amount of rent/mesne profits for use and occupation,” the court observed. However, it added, “the petitioner has not filed even a single document on record to prima facie show that there had been a relationship of landlord and tenant between the partiThe Court dismissed the petition, emphasizing the lack of concrete evidence supporting the existence of a landlord-tenant relationship and the consequent applicability of Order XV-A CPC.

Date of Decision: March 20, 2024

Manjeet Singh Kohli vs. Balveen Singh Chadha @ Balveen Singh Chawla & Anr.

Similar News