Renewal Is Not Extension Unless Terms Are Fixed in Same Deed: Bombay High Court Strikes Down ₹64.75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand on Nine-Year Lease Fraud Vitiates All Solemn Acts—Appointment Void Ab Initio Even After 27 Years: Allahabad High Court Litigants Cannot Be Penalised For Attending Criminal Proceedings Listed On Same Day: Delhi High Court Restores Civil Suit Dismissed For Default Limited Permissive Use Confers No Right to Expand Trademark Beyond Agreed Territories: Bombay High Court Enforces Consent Decree in ‘New Indian Express’ Trademark Dispute Assam Rifles Not Entitled to Parity with Indian Army Merely Due to Similar Duties: Delhi High Court Dismisses Equal Pay Petition Conspiracy Cannot Be Presumed from Illicit Relationship: Bombay High Court Acquits Wife, Affirms Conviction of Paramour in Murder Case Bail in NDPS Commercial Quantity Cases Cannot Be Granted Without Satisfying Twin Conditions of Section 37: Delhi High Court Cancels Bail Orders Terming Them ‘Perversely Illegal’ Article 21 Rights Not Absolute In Cases Threatening National Security: Supreme Court Sets Aside Bail Granted In Jnaneshwari Express Derailment Case A Computer Programme That Solves a Technical Problem Is Not Barred Under Section 3(k): Madras High Court Allows Patent for Software-Based Data Lineage System Premature Auction Without 30-Day Redemption Violates Section 176 and Bank’s Own Terms: Orissa High Court Quashes Canara Bank’s Gold Loan Sale Courts Can’t Stall Climate-Resilient Public Projects: Madras High Court Lifts Status Quo on Eco Park, Pond Works at Race Club Land No Cross-Examination, No Conviction: Gujarat High Court Quashes Customs Penalty for Violating Principles of Natural Justice ITAT Was Wrong in Disregarding Statements Under Oath, But Additions Unsustainable Without Corroborative Evidence: Madras High Court Deduction Theory Under Old Land Acquisition Law Has No Place Under 2013 Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Enhances Compensation for Metro Land Acquisition UIT Cannot Turn Around After Issuing Pattas, It's Estopped Now: Rajasthan High Court Private Doctor’s Widow Eligible for COVID Insurance if Duty Proven: Supreme Court Rebukes Narrow Interpretation of COVID-Era Orders Smaller Benches Cannot Override Constitution Bench Authority Under The Guise Of Clarification: Supreme Court Criticises Judicial Indiscipline Public Premises Act, 1971 | PP Act Overrides State Rent Control Laws for All Tenancies; Suhas Pophale Overruled: Supreme Court Court Has No Power To Reduce Sentence Below Statutory Minimum Under NDPS Act: Supreme Court Denies Relief To Young Mother Convicted With 23.5 kg Ganja Non-Compliance With Section 52-A Is Not Per Se Fatal: Supreme Court Clarifies Law On Sampling Procedure Under NDPS Act MBA Degree Doesn’t Feed the Stomach: Delhi High Court Says Wife’s Qualification No Ground to Deny Maintenance POCSO Presumption Is Not a Dead Letter, But ‘Sterling Witness’ Test Still Governs Conviction: Bombay High Court High Courts Cannot Routinely Entertain Contempt Petitions Beyond One Year: Madras High Court Declines Contempt Plea Filed After Four Years Courts Cannot Reject Suit by Weighing Evidence at Threshold: Delhi High Court Restores Discrimination Suit by Indian Staff Against Italian Embassy Improvised Testimonies and Dubious Recovery Cannot Sustain Murder Conviction: Allahabad High Court Acquits Two In Murder Case Sale with Repurchase Condition is Not a Mortgage: Bombay High Court Reverses Redemption Decree After 27-Year Delay Second Transfer Application on Same Grounds is Not Maintainable: Punjab & Haryana High Court Clarifies Legal Position under Section 24 CPC Custodial Interrogation Is Not Punitive — Arrest Cannot Be Used as a Tool to Humiliate in Corporate Offence Allegations: Delhi High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail Partnership Act | Eviction Suit by Unregistered Firm Maintainable if Based on Statutory Right: Madhya Pradesh High Court Reasonable Grounds Under Section 37 of NDPS Act Cannot Be Equated with Proof; They Must Reflect More Than Suspicion, But Less Than Conviction: J&K HC Apprehension to Life Is a Just Ground for Transfer When Roots Lie in History of Ideological Violence: Bombay High Court Transfers Defamation Suits Against Hamid Dabholkar, Nikhil Wagle From Goa to Maharashtra

Delhi High Court Sets Aside Eviction Orders, Highlights Distinction Between Sections 14(1)(e) and 14(1)(g) of DRC Act

05 September 2024 5:34 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasmeet Singh, has set aside eviction orders and emphasized the critical distinction between Sections 14(1)(e) and 14(1)(g) of the Delhi Rent Control (DRC) Act. The judgment, delivered on October 4, 2023, in the case of RC.REV. 540/2018 and connected petitions, revolves around the eviction of tenants from Katra Ganga Bishan, Bagh Raoji, Gaushala Marg, Kishanganj, Delhi – 110006, owned by the petitioner, Vijay Kumar Farshwal.

The Hon'ble Justice Singh's observations shed light on the legal intricacies of eviction under the DRC Act. In a significant ruling, the court clarified that the mere labeling of an eviction petition as a "bona fide need" under Section 14(1)(e) cannot bypass the requirements of Sections 14(1)(f) and 14(1)(g), which pertain to reconstruction, demolition, and rebuilding of premises. Justice Singh noted, "Eviction sought under Section 14(1)(e) includes the need by the landlord for the purpose of running a business or conducting commercial activity." This distinction underscores the importance of correctly categorizing eviction petitions and their implications.

Furthermore, the judgment highlights the limited scope of review petitions. Justice Singh reiterated that review petitions should not be allowed to function as "appeals in disguise." He emphasized that a review can only be sought if there is an "error apparent on the face of the order" and that erroneous decisions cannot be reheard and corrected through the review process.

The judgment also addressed the timing of review petitions and the power of Rent Controllers. It emphasized that while Rent Controllers may not have the power to recall an order, they can review their own orders under certain circumstances, particularly if a miscarriage of justice is evident.

This judgment is expected to have significant implications for eviction proceedings under the DRC Act, providing clarity on the distinctions between various eviction grounds and the appropriate procedures to be followed. It reaffirms the importance of adhering to the legal provisions and procedures specified in the Act when seeking eviction of tenants in Delhi.

Date of Decision: 04 October 2023

VIJAY KUMAR FARSHWAL  vs SHRI KISHAN LAL 

Latest Legal News