Delhi High Court Flags Trend Of Rich Tenants Occupying Landlord’s Property On ‘Paltry’ Rate In Dispute Over ₹40 Rent In Sadar Bazar Area
The Delhi Excessive Court docket not too long ago raised issues over the development of financially well-off tenants persevering with to occupy the owner’s property for many years altogether, whereas parting with a really meagre lease.
Irked by mere ₹40 lease paid by the Respondent-tenants in Delhi’s Sadar Bazar space, Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani ordered their eviction.
Permitting the Petitioner-landlord’s plea, the Court docket noticed,
“Thoroughly-off tenants having fun with monetary prosperity persist in unjustly occupying premises for many years on-end, paying pittance for lease, whereas within the course of their landlords are pressured into impecunious and determined circumstances, ensuing from egregious misuse of an anachronistic piece of laws, specifically the Delhi Lease Management Act, 1958.”
Petitioners’ premises had been within the occupation of the Respondents for greater than 50 years and no lease settlement was said to have been executed between the events.
The Respondents nonetheless refused to vacate the premises, when the owner sought it for his private use. It was additionally contended that the Petitioners weren’t homeowners of the topic premises, and that subsequently they weren’t landlords.
The Excessive Court docket reiterated that it doesn’t lie within the mouth of a tenant to dispute the title of his landlord.
“It’s long-settled that to hunt eviction, all {that a} landlord wants to point out is that he enjoys rights to the demised premises which are higher than that of the tenant. The vesting of absolute title to a premises in a landlord just isn’t a prerequisite for deciding an eviction petition,” the bench noticed and ordered eviction.
Look: Ms. Devna Soni, Mr. Jatin Sehgal, Mr. Ashish Garg, Ms. Simran Bajaj and Mr. Shubham Aggarwal, Advocates for Petitioners; Mr. S.C. Singhal, Mr. Saideep Kaushik and Mr. Parth Mahajan, Advocates for Respondent
Case title: Mrs Madhurbhashani & Ors v. Ranjit Singh (and linked matter)
Case no.: RC.REV. 95/2014
