Part-Time Workers Serving For Decades Entitled To Regularization; 'Uma Devi' Ruling Cannot Be Weaponized To Deny Legitimate Claims: Rajasthan High Court Order Rejecting Or Allowing To Register FIR U/S Section 156(3) CrPC Application Is Not Interlocutory; Criminal Revision Is Maintainable: Punjab & Haryana High Court Default Bail | Failure To Produce Accused During Hearing For Extension Of Remand Time Is Gross Illegality, Violates Article 21: Andhra Pradesh High Court Section 138 NI Act Liability Of Directors Subsists Despite Initiation Of Liquidation Proceedings Against Company: Supreme Court Purchaser Of Property For Valuable Consideration Cannot Be Accused Of Cheating Original Owner If Title Document Is Forged: Supreme Court Appointment Of Minor To Public Post Is Per Se Illegal, Void Ab Initio: Allahabad High Court Arbitral Tribunal Cannot Abdicate Duty To Decide Limitation Objection Merely Because High Court Appointed Arbitrator: Allahabad High Court Deemed Conveyance Cannot Be Restricted To Building Footprint; Must Include Appurtenant Open Spaces Required By Planning Law: Bombay High Court Mere Discovery Of Accused's Presence At A Location Not A 'Fact Discovered' Under Section 27 Evidence Act: Delhi High Court Acquits Official In 1989 Bribe Case Section 307 IPC Is Not A 'Minor Offence' To Section 324 IPC; Accused Cannot Be Convicted For Attempt To Murder If Only Charged With Voluntarily Causing Hurt: Delhi High Court Landowners Under National Highways Act Entitled To 15% Interest On Enhanced Compensation; Denial Is Discriminatory: Punjab & Haryana HC Omission Of Village Name In Gazette Notification No Bar To Laying Transmission Lines If Area Falls 'Around' Notified Route: Orissa High Court NBFCs Cannot Use Force For Vehicle Repossession; Coercive Debt Recovery Violates Right To Livelihood Under Article 21: Uttarakhand High Court Non-Candidates Cannot Be Impleaded As Parties In Election Petitions Even If Allegations Of Impropriety Are Made: J&K&L High Court Lowest Bidder Has No Vested Right To Contract; Budgetary Constraints Valid Ground To Cancel Tender: Jharkhand High Court Confiscation Of Vehicle Under Section 49 Assam Forest Regulation Is Only Temporary; Final Confiscation Requires Conviction Under Section 51: Gauhati High Court Amendment Of Written Statement Cannot Be Allowed After Trial Commences If Facts Were Within Party's Knowledge: Delhi High Court

Simple Denial of Landlord-Tenant Relationship Insufficient to Prevent Provisional Rent Assessment: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Ejectment for Non-Payment of Rent

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that a mere denial of the landlord-tenant relationship is not enough to stop the court from assessing provisional rent. This came in the context of a landlord-tenant dispute where the tenant failed to disclose the basis of possession over the property. The decision was given by Justice Sukhvinder Kaur in the case of Lucky Malik @ Bangali vs. Akali Times Trust.

The court dealt with the issue of provisional rent assessment and subsequent ejectment of the tenant for non-payment under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act. The crux was whether a simple denial of the landlord-tenant relationship could negate the need for provisional rent assessment.

The dispute revolved around a property in Jalandhar, where the respondent Trust claimed the petitioner as their tenant since 2008, alleging non-payment of rent from July 2010. The petitioner, denying the landlord-tenant relationship, contested the trust's ownership and his liability to pay rent.

Justice Sukhvinder Kaur, in her judgment, emphasized that the trust was established as the owner of the premises based on a civil court decree dated 29.09.1980. The petitioner's possession of the property was not disputed; however, his failure to clarify the basis of possession raised questions. The court asserted, "Under the garb of denial of tenancy, the tenant cannot be allowed to enjoy the property." Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court judgment in Asha Rani Gupta Vs. Sri Vineet Kumar, underscoring the obligation to assess provisional rent in the absence of a clear disclosure of possession basis by the tenant.

The High Court dismissed the revision petitions filed by the petitioner, Lucky Malik, affirming the orders of the Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority. The ejectment of the petitioner for non-payment of provisional rent was upheld, guided by the precedent set in Rakesh Wadhawan vs. M/s Jagdamba Industrial Corporation, which mandates compliance with the order of provisional rent.

Date of Decision: 13.02.2024

Lucky Malik @ Bangali vs. Akali Times Trust

Latest Legal News