At the Stage of Framing Charge, Presumption Suffices; Suicide Note and Grave Suspicion Enough: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Charge Under Section 306 IPC 173 CrPC | Framing of Charge Marks End of Investigation—Complainant Cannot Reopen Probe Merely by Citing Police Lapses: Bombay High Court Recovery Alone Cannot Prove Guilt: Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Photos, Videos Must Go: Supreme Court Binds Warring Spouses to Clean Up Social Media in Matrimonial Settlement Standard for Bail Under Section 319 CrPC Is Higher Than Framing of Charge, But Short of Conviction: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Accused Summoned Mid-Trial State Cannot Arbitrarily Deny Subsidies to 'New Industrial Units' by Retrospectively Applying Expansion Caps: Supreme Court Companies Act | Offence Under Section 448 Is Covered Under Section 447: Supreme Court Bars Private Complaint Without SFIO Nod “See-To-It” Obligation Is Not A Guarantee Under Indian Law: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope Of Section 126 ICA In IBC Disputes Mere Employment of Litigant’s Relatives in Police or Court Doesn't Prove Judicial Bias: Supreme Court Sets Aside Transfer of Criminal Case Reserved Candidate Availing Relaxed Standards in Prelims Cannot Migrate to General Quota for Cadre Allocation: Supreme Court Mere Vesting Does Not Mean Possession: Supreme Court Rules ULC Proceedings Abated For Failure To Serve Mandatory Notice To Actual Occupants Contempt of Courts Act | Natural Justice in Administrative Action: Supreme Court Directs West Bengal Govt to Re-Adjudicate Teachers' Arrears Claims Live-In Relationship with Married Man Not a ‘Relationship in the Nature of Marriage’ Under Domestic Violence Act: Bombay High Court Applies Supreme Court Guidelines Income Tax Act | Substitution of Shares held as Stock-in-Trade upon Amalgamation constitutes Taxable Business Income if Commercially Realisable: Supreme Court Judges Cannot Enact Their Own Protocols During Bail Hearings: Supreme Court Sets Aside Sweeping Age Determination Directions In POCSO If There Is Knowledge That Injury Is Likely To Cause Death, But No Intention Falls Under Section 304 Part II:  Supreme Court High Court Ignored POCSO’s Statutory Rigour, Committed Grave Error in Granting Bail: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Gang-Rape Accused Section 22 HSA | Co-Heirs Have Statutory Right of Pre-Emption Even in Urban Property: Punjab & Haryana High Court 138 NI Act | Issuance of Separate Cheques Gives Rise to Independent Causes of Action, Even if Drawn for Same Underlying Transaction: Supreme Court

Landlord’s Interest Fundamental in Tenant-Led Demolition Suits: Bombay High Court Upholds

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment that impacts the dynamics of landlord-tenant disputes in the context of municipal demolition actions, the Bombay High Court, led by Justices Nitin Jamdar and Amit Borkar, has made a definitive ruling on November 29, 2023. The court clarified the legal stance on the inclusion of landlords in suits filed by tenants against municipal authorities for demolition actions.

Justice Nitin Jamdar stated in the judgment, “The impact of a notice for demolition issued by the Corporation extends beyond the tenant to fundamentally affect the property itself.” This statement underlines the court’s recognition of landlords’ vital interest in properties subject to demolition notices by municipal corporations.

Cantered around the interpretation of Order I Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (C.P.C.), the court delved into the nuances of joining parties in civil litigation. The High Court’s decision reconciles differing views from past judgments, aligning with key Supreme Court precedents such as M/s. Aliji Momonji & Co. V. Lalji Mavji and Mohamed Hussain Gulam Ali Shariffi v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay.

This landmark ruling is poised to reshape the legal landscape in property disputes, particularly in cities where conflicts between tenants, landlords, and municipal bodies are common. By affirming the importance of landlords’ participation in such cases, the High Court ensures a more comprehensive legal process, reflecting all concerned parties’ interests.

Legal circles view this judgment as an affirmation of property rights and a crucial move towards more inclusive and equitable adjudication in civil disputes. The judgment signifies the court’s intent to ensure that property owners are not sidelined in legal battles that directly affect their properties.

Date of Decision: 29 November 2023

Ashok Babulal Avasthi VS Munna Nizamuddin Khan and Others 

Latest Legal News