Landlordship / Ownership : 6 Important Case Laws

1. Bhim Singh Saini v. Preeti Gupta [Delhi High Court, 22-09-2015]

A married daughter cannot ask for commercial accommodation from her mother / father after marriage.

2. Jiwan Lal v. Gurdial Kaur, 1995 RLR 162 

There is a tendency on the part of tenants to deny ownership in cases under Section 14(1)(e). To test the substance of such a plea on the part of the tenants the Courts have insisted that they should state who else is the owner of the premises if not the petitioner. In the present case it is not said as to who else is the owner. Further these cases under Section 14(1)(e) are not title cases involving disputes of title to the property. Ownership is not to be proved in absolute terms. The respondent does not claim the owner of the premises.

3. Shanti Sharma v. Ved Prabha, AIR 1987 SC 2028

The meaning of term 'owner' is vis a vis the tenant i.e. the owner should be something more than the tenant.

4. Bharat Bhushan Vij v. Arti Teckchandani, 153 (2008) DLT 247

The concept of ownership in a landlord-tenant litigation governed by the Delhi Rent Control Act, has to be distinguished from the one in a title suit. If the premises was let out by a person and after his death, the premises has come in the hands of beneficiary under a Will, the tenant has no right to challenge the title of such a beneficiary. If on the death of the original owner the tenant has any doubt as to who was the owner of the premises, he is supposed to file an interpleader suit impleading all the legal heirs of the deceased and ask the Court to decide as to who shall be the landlord/owner after the death of the original owner. Where no interpleader suit is filed by the tenant and the tenant continues in possession after death of the original owner without demur and without raising an objection against the person, who claims to have inherited the property under the Will, he later on cannot challenge the ownership of such a person. It is not the domain of the tenant to challenge the Will of the deceased landlord. If a landlord is able to show that there is a testament in his/her favour, he/she is deemed to have discharged his/her burden of proving the ownership under the Act. If the tenant takes a frivolous objection about ownership, such an objection cannot be entertained unless the tenant comes forward as to who was the landlord/owner of the premises and to whom he has been paying rent after the death of the original owner.

5. Ram Chander v. Ram Pyari, 109 (2004) DLT 388 

It was not for the tenant to challenge the Will of the landlord and any such challenge made by the tenant is a baseless and frivolous challenge.

6. Plashchemicals Company v. Ashit Chadha, 114 (2004) DLT 408 

Landlord need not prove her / his ownership in absolute term. It is sufficient is landlord is able to show that he is something more than the tenant.

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post