BIBI ZAFIRA KHATOON AND OTHERS versus MOHAMMED HUSSAIN AND ANOTHER

BIBI ZAFIRA KHATOON AND OTHERS versus MOHAMMED HUSSAIN AND ANOTHER

Section 12 of Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 applies to all persons occupying tenanted premises, even if not tenants, unless protected by independent title or express written permission as a tenant; since Respondent No.1's suits for specific performance and title were dismissed and he was neither a tenant nor had independent title, the eviction decree binds him and must be executed against him.

Parties
Appellant: Bibi Zafira Khatoon; Appellant: Syed Mohammed Jalaluddin (since deceased); Respondent: Mohammed Hussain; Respondent: Mohammed Manzurool Haque
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
17 September 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court's Dismissal of Civil Revision Against Execution Refusal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Eviction, Execution of Decree, Bonafide Requirement, Default in Payment of Rent
Rent Control Property Law Eviction Execution of Decree Bonafide Requirement Default in Payment of Rent

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

Parties

Bibi Zafira Khatoon

Appellant

Syed Mohammed Jalaluddin (since deceased)

Appellant

Mohammed Hussain

Respondent

Mohammed Manzurool Haque

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court's Dismissal of Civil Revision Against Execution Refusal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Applicability of Section 12 of Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 to persons other than tenants
  2. 2 Whether eviction decree can be executed against a person who claims to be owner or has filed title suit
  3. 3 Binding effect of eviction decree on occupiers not recognised as tenants

Ratio Decidendi

Section 12 of Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 applies to all persons occupying tenanted premises, even if not tenants, unless protected by independent title or express written permission as a tenant; since Respondent No.1's suits for specific performance and title were dismissed and he was neither a tenant nor had independent title, the eviction decree binds him and must be executed against him.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Execution application allowed; Respondent No.1 and his family granted three months to vacate suit premises and hand over possession to appellants, conditional on filing usual undertaking within four weeks.