Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

Landlord is the Best Judge of His Requirement: Delhi High Court Upholds Eviction Order

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment delivered on February 9, 2024, Justice Girish Kathpalia of the Delhi High Court has upheld an eviction order against tenants in the case of Shri Rajiv Kumar & Anr versus Shri Chaman Lal & Ors. The court observed, "Landlord is the best judge of his requirement," emphasizing the landlord's right to reclaim their property when in bona fide need.

The case revolved around the provisions of the Delhi Rent Control Act, particularly Section 14(1)(e), which deals with the eviction of tenants for the bona fide requirement of landlords. The petitioners, tenants of the subject premises, had challenged the order of the learned Rent Controller, which allowed their eviction.

The landlords filed for eviction under Section 14(1)(e), asserting a need for the premises due to lack of suitable alternative accommodation and health issues. The tenants contested this, alleging that the landlords already possessed alternate properties and that their requirement was not bona fide.

The court meticulously analyzed the arguments, observing that the tenants failed to provide substantial evidence to support their claims of alternate accommodation owned by the landlords. The court noted, "It is not permissible for the High Court in such proceedings to arrive at a finding of fact different from the one recorded by the Rent Controller, unless the findings of fact recorded by the Rent Controller were so unreasonable that no Rent Controller would have recorded the same on the material available."

The judgment emphasized the principles underlying the Delhi Rent Control Act, particularly the need for a landlord to obtain speedy remedy when genuinely requiring the tenanted premises. It was underscored that the court must strike a balance between the landlord's right to eviction and the tenant's right to contest.

Justice Kathpalia dismissed the revision petition, upholding the eviction order. The court found no triable issue warranting a full-fledged trial, asserting that the landlord's requirement for the premises was genuine and bona fide.

Date of Decision: February 09, 2024.

Shri Rajiv Kumar & Anr vs Shri Chaman Lal & Ors

Latest Legal News