SUSHIL KUMAR METHA versus GOBIND RAM BOHRA

SUSHIL KUMAR METHA versus GOBIND RAM BOHRA

The civil court inherently lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit for eviction of the appellant-tenant as the premises were governed by the Haryana Urban Rent Control Act, 1973, giving exclusive jurisdiction to the Controller; therefore, the decree passed by the civil court is a nullity, does not bind the appellant, and does not operate as res judicata. The appellant could successfully challenge the decree as nullity even in execution proceedings.

Parties
Appellant Tenant: Sushil Kumar Mehta; Respondent Landlord: Gobind Ram Bohra
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 November 1989
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Under Article 136 of the Constitution
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Eviction, Jurisdiction, Nullity of Decree, Res Judicata
Property Law Rent Control Civil Procedure Eviction Jurisdiction Nullity of Decree Res Judicata

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 5 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sushil Kumar Mehta

Appellant Tenant

Gobind Ram Bohra

Respondent Landlord

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Under Article 136 of the Constitution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the civil court lacked inherent jurisdiction to entertain suit for eviction under Haryana Urban Rent Control Act, 1973.
  2. 2 Whether the decree passed by the civil court is a nullity and does not operate as res judicata.

Ratio Decidendi

The civil court inherently lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit for eviction of the appellant-tenant as the premises were governed by the Haryana Urban Rent Control Act, 1973, giving exclusive jurisdiction to the Controller; therefore, the decree passed by the civil court is a nullity, does not bind the appellant, and does not operate as res judicata. The appellant could successfully challenge the decree as nullity even in execution proceedings.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • The decree passed by the civil court for ejectment is declared a nullity and does not bind the appellant-tenant.
  • In the circumstances, parties are directed to bear their own costs.