DWARKA PRASAD versus DWARKA DAS SARAF

DWARKA PRASAD versus DWARKA DAS SARAF

The subject lease is a composite lease where the dominant intention was to let the cinema business—with equipment and machinery—and only secondarily the building; therefore, it is not 'accommodation' protected by the U.P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947, and the landlord is entitled to eviction.

Parties
Appellant: Dwarka Prasad; Respondent: Dwarka Das Saraf
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
11 August 1975
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Judgment and Decree of Allahabad High Court (first Appeal No. 448 of 1968 Decided 13th March 1972)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; landlord entitled to decree for eviction.
Legal Topics
Scope of 'accommodation' Under Rent Control Act, Composite Leases and Dominant Purpose Test, Interpretation of Statutory Definition and Proviso
Landlord and Tenant Rent Control Property Law Scope of 'accommodation' Under Rent Control Act Composite Leases and Dominant Purpose Test Interpretation of Statutory Definition and Proviso

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dwarka Prasad

Appellant

Dwarka Das Saraf

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Judgment and Decree of Allahabad High Court (first Appeal No. 448 of 1968 Decided 13th March 1972)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lease of a cinema theatre with projectors, fittings, and fixtures is 'accommodation' under s. 2(a) of the U.P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947.
  2. 2 Effect of the 1954 proviso excluding accommodation used as factory or industrial purpose when business is also leased.
  3. 3 Whether such composite lease is protected by the Rent Control Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The subject lease is a composite lease where the dominant intention was to let the cinema business—with equipment and machinery—and only secondarily the building; therefore, it is not 'accommodation' protected by the U.P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947, and the landlord is entitled to eviction.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; landlord entitled to decree for eviction.

Orders

  • Decree of eviction in favour of appellant-landlord.
  • Trial court to determine mesne profits from date of suit.