ASHOK KAPIL versus SANA ULLAH (DEAD) AND ORS.

ASHOK KAPIL versus SANA ULLAH (DEAD) AND ORS.

If a structure was a building as per the statutory definition when it fell vacant, the District Magistrate's jurisdiction to allot is attracted and not defeated by subsequent removal of the roof by the landlord. A liberal and purposive interpretation is called for to prevent a landlord from defeating the Act's object by his own wrongful act, and the definition of 'building' includes contextual flexibility under 'unless the context otherwise requires'.

Parties
Appellant: Ashok Kapil; Respondents: Sana Ullah (dead) and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
25 September 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Allahabad High Court Decision in Writ Petition
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Judgment of the Allahabad High Court set aside.
Legal Topics
Allotment of Building, Definition of Building, Eviction, Jurisdiction of District Magistrate, Interpretation of Statute
Rent Control Property Law Allotment of Building Definition of Building Eviction Jurisdiction of District Magistrate Interpretation of Statute

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ashok Kapil

Appellant

Sana Ullah (dead) and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Allahabad High Court Decision in Writ Petition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a structure that was a building at the time it fell vacant but became roofless before the allotment order can still be allotted under Section 16 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972
  2. 2 Whether the landlord can take advantage of his own wrong in dismantling the roof to defeat allotment proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

If a structure was a building as per the statutory definition when it fell vacant, the District Magistrate's jurisdiction to allot is attracted and not defeated by subsequent removal of the roof by the landlord. A liberal and purposive interpretation is called for to prevent a landlord from defeating the Act's object by his own wrongful act, and the definition of 'building' includes contextual flexibility under 'unless the context otherwise requires'.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Judgment of the Allahabad High Court set aside.

Orders

  • Restores the allotment order in favour of the appellant.
  • Appellant to pay rent at enhanced monthly rate of Rs. 500 from 1.8.1996 onwards.