Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

High Court Upholds Eviction Order, Citing Landlord’s Bona Fide Need for Business Expansion

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Chandigarh, June 1, 2023: In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana upheld an eviction order, emphasizing the bona fide need of the landlord for the expansion of his son’s business. The judgment, delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.S. Madaan, highlighted the landlord’s right to decide his requirements and dismissed allegations of material fact concealment.

The case, titled “Krishan Lal and others vs. Ashok Jain,” revolved around a petition filed by landlord Ashok Jain seeking the eviction of tenant-firm Krishan Lal and his sons from a shop in Ambala Cantt. The landlord asserted that the shop was required for his son and daughter-in-law to expand their scientific equipment/material business.

Addressing the issue of concealed properties, the court noted that the landlord had disclosed the previous vacation of a shop for his daughter’s business and highlighted that the vacant shop was under his supervision. It further clarified that the landlord was not obliged to disclose other non-commercial or residential properties.

Regarding the conversion of the property from residential to non-residential use, the court found no evidence to support such a claim. It established that the shop had always been a commercial property and had adjoining shops opening towards the bazaar, negating any residential purpose.

Justice Madaan stated, “A landlord is the best judge of his requirement,” emphasizing the landlord’s right to seek possession for business expansion. The judgment also referred to the legislative safeguard against ejectments for extraneous reasons.

The court rejected the tenant’s argument that the shop’s vacancy could be utilized by the landlord’s son and daughter-in-law. It underscored the suitability of the demised shop for the expansion of the son’s business, emphasizing that it was not the tenants’ role to advise the landlord on alternative arrangements.

In dismissing the revision petition, the court held, “The impugned order passed by the Appellate Authority... does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity and is not having any element of arbitrariness or perversity.”

Date of decision:-1.6.2023

Krishan Lal and others  VS Ashok Jain                                

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Krishan-Lal-Vs-Ashok-Jain-01-June-23-PHHC1-1.pdf"]

Latest Legal News