GURDIAL SINGH AND ORS. versus RAJ KUMAR ANEJA AND ORS.

GURDIAL SINGH AND ORS. versus RAJ KUMAR ANEJA AND ORS.

Eviction is justified under Section 13(2)(ii)(a) as sub-letting occurred without written consent of landlord; oral consent is insufficient where written consent is statutorily mandated.

Parties
Appellants: Gurdial Singh and Ors.; Respondents: Raj Kumar Aneja and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 February 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned judgment of High Court set aside; judgment of Appellate Authority restored.
Legal Topics
Eviction, Sub Letting, Amendment of Pleadings
Rent Control Civil Procedure Eviction Sub Letting Amendment of Pleadings

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gurdial Singh and Ors.

Appellants

Raj Kumar Aneja and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sub-letting without written consent constitutes ground for eviction under Section 13(2)(ii)(a) of East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949
  2. 2 Whether amendment of written statements complied with procedural requirements under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC
  3. 3 Whether oral consent of landlord suffices for sub-letting where law requires written consent

Ratio Decidendi

Eviction is justified under Section 13(2)(ii)(a) as sub-letting occurred without written consent of landlord; oral consent is insufficient where written consent is statutorily mandated.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned judgment of High Court set aside; judgment of Appellate Authority restored.

Orders

  • Eviction order granted based on sub-letting without written consent.
  • No order as to costs.