Section 164 CrPC Statement Recorded Without Procedural Safeguards Or 'Cooling-Off' Period Not A Valid Confession: Jharkhand High Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Investigation Is At A Nascent Stage If Custodial Interrogation Is Not Indispensable: Telangana High Court Actual Pay Drawn During Last 10 Months Must Be Basis For Pension Calculation, Regardless Of Notional Pay In Parent Bank: Punjab & Haryana High Court Limitation For Redemption Of Usufructuary Mortgage Starts Only When Mortgage Money Is Paid Or Tendered: Allahabad High Court Exclusion Of Natural Heir From Will Not A Suspicious Circumstance If Execution Is Duly Proved: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Travel Abroad Is A Basic Human Right; Permission Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Visit Is For 'Social Or Celebratory' Purpose: Andhra Pradesh High Court Citizen Cannot Be Externed Merely For Raising Grievances Against Government Decisions: Bombay High Court Lack Of Opportunity To Cross-Examine Partition Commissioner Does Not Vitiate Final Decree; Report Is Part Of Record: Calcutta High Court Section 27 Evidence Act Recoveries Inadmissible If Police Had Prior Knowledge Of Location Before Recording Disclosure: Delhi High Court Foreigners Act | Burden Of Proof To Establish Citizenship Solely On Proceedee, Never Shifts; Prescription For Parkinson's No Proof Of Mental Illness To Explain Testimony Contradictions: Gauhati High Court Trial Court Erred In Abating Suit While Application To Bring Legal Heirs On Record Was Pending: Gujarat High Court Places Of Worship Act 1991 Not A Shield Against Land Acquisition By State For Public Purpose: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Partition Deed Creating New Rights In Immovable Property Inadmissible In Evidence: Himachal Pradesh High Court Illiteracy No Excuse For Filing False Income Tax Returns, Court Must Presume Culpable Mental State Under Section 278E: Jharkhand High Court Trial Court Must Consider Convenience Of Family & Accused's Right To Assist Counsel While Deciding Jail Shifting Applications: J&K High Court Investigation Substantially Complete, Offence Carries Max 7 Years Jail: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To Police Officers In Corruption Case Buyer's Knowledge Of Title Defect Doesn't Extinguish Statutory Warranty Of Title Unless Sale Deed Specifically Excludes It: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Sets Aside Appointment Of PAs To Judges, Says Relaxation Of Qualifications Via Circular Violates Article 14 BNSS | Mere Allegation Of Calling Deceased To Spot Not Sufficient To Deny Bail To Woman If Charge Sheet Filed: Orissa High Court Amendment To Rectify Property Description In Agreement To Sell Can Be Allowed At Any Stage Of Specific Performance Suit: Delhi High Court NDPS | Confession Before Police Cannot Be Sole Basis For Prosecution: Telangana High Court Grants Bail No Judicial Sanctity For Adulterous Relationships: J&K High Court Refuses To Quash Abduction FIR Involving Married Woman Habitual Offender Accused Of Brutal Murder Of SC Community Member Denied Bail: Kerala High Court Prosecution Fails To Prove Murder Charge As Recovery Witnesses Turn Hostile: Uttarakhand High Court Acquits Man Acquittal In Criminal Case Based On Benefit Of Doubt Does Not Automatically Absolve Employee From Disciplinary Liability: Madhya Pradesh High Court Punjab & Haryana HC Quashes FIR Against Woman For Dressing Pet Dog As Lord Krishna Personal Laws Cannot Be Used As Shield To Commit Gang Rape Under Garb Of Nikah Halala: Allahabad High Court

Delhi High Court Upholds Trial Court's Order, Dismisses Petition Challenging Substitution of Legal Heirs in Eviction Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment dated September 27, 2023, the Delhi High Court, presided over by HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, upheld the order of the Trial Court in a case involving the substitution of legal heirs in an eviction petition. The petitioner, Shri Ram Maggo, had challenged the Trial Court's decision to allow the application filed by the legal heirs of the deceased landlady, Smt. Munto Begum.

One of the key objections raised by the petitioner was the lack of a formal application for condonation of delay in filing the substitution application. However, the High Court addressed this issue by referring to a Supreme Court judgment dated 10.01.2022 in Suo Moto W.P.(C) 3/2020, which allowed for the exclusion of a specific period for the purposes of limitation. In light of this, the objection regarding limitation was deemed untenable.

Another objection raised by the petitioner was the non-disclosure of details of all Class-I legal heirs of the deceased landlady in the application for substitution. The Trial Court had considered the original Will dated 17.09.2020, which was filed as evidence, and had allowed the application based on its contents. The High Court noted that the Trial Court's order did not suffer from any error or infirmity, and the rights of other legal heirs were specifically preserved.

The High Court further emphasized that the petitioner, who was a tenant in the property in question, lacked the locus to raise objections to the application filed by the sons of the deceased landlady under Order XXII Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC). It was suggested that the objections raised appeared to be a delay tactic in the adjudication of the application for leave to defend, which was pending before the Trial Court.

Consequently, the High Court dismissed the petition, affirming the Trial Court's order, and deemed the petition to be without merit.

Representing the petitioner, Shri Ram Maggo, were advocates Mr. Rahul Kr. Singh and Mr. Shailendra Kr. Singh. The judgment, while addressing the petitioner's objections, reiterated the importance of following legal procedures in matters related to substitution and eviction, ensuring that the rights of all parties involved are duly considered.

Date of Decision: September 27, 2023

SHRI RAM MAGGO  vs  SMT MUNTO BEGUM NOW DECEASED  & ORS

 

Latest Legal News