ARYA SAMAJ, SAGAR & ORS. versus PINJAMAL & ANR.

ARYA SAMAJ, SAGAR & ORS. versus PINJAMAL & ANR.

Eviction under s.12(1)(f) is justified when landlord proves bona fide and reasonable requirement for occupation of premises for his business, and mere reconstruction or intention to make additions does not preclude claim if need is genuine.

Parties
Appellant: Arya Samaj, Sagar & Ors.; Respondent: Pinjamal & Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
08 August 1986
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Eviction, Requirement for Additional Accommodation, Bonafide Need, Reconstruction, Interpretation of Sanctioned Plan
Landlord Tenant Law Eviction Requirement for Additional Accommodation Bonafide Need Reconstruction Interpretation of Sanctioned Plan

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arya Samaj, Sagar & Ors.

Appellant

Pinjamal & Anr.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether eviction can be ordered under s.12(1)(f) of the MP Accommodation Control Act, 1961 for requirement of additional accommodation for the landlord's school.
  2. 2 Whether High Court erred in construing the landlord's claim as based on reconstruction rather than bonafide requirement.

Ratio Decidendi

Eviction under s.12(1)(f) is justified when landlord proves bona fide and reasonable requirement for occupation of premises for his business, and mere reconstruction or intention to make additions does not preclude claim if need is genuine.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of the High Court is set aside.
  • Orders of Additional District Judge and Trial Court are restored, subject to modifications.