HARIDEV MISRA versus JAMUNADAS AGARWAL & ORS

HARIDEV MISRA versus JAMUNADAS AGARWAL & ORS

The landlord cannot raise a new plea regarding furnished tenancy at the Supreme Court stage, and the evidence establishes that the rent for the house was Rs.40 per month with Rs.30 separately for furniture, which was returned. Therefore, the appellant was not a defaulter and not liable for eviction.

Parties
Appellant: Haridev Misra; Respondent: Jamunadas Agarwal
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
17 February 1989
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal (by Special Leave) From Allahabad High Court Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Eviction, Arrears of Rent, Pleading, Furnished Tenancy
Landlord Tenant Law Eviction Arrears of Rent Pleading Furnished Tenancy

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Haridev Misra

Appellant

Jamunadas Agarwal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal (by Special Leave) From Allahabad High Court Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether landlord can raise a new plea that tenancy was for furnished house at the Supreme Court stage
  2. 2 Whether default in payment for furniture constitutes arrears of rent under U.P. Urban Building Act
  3. 3 Determination of correct rate of rent for eviction

Ratio Decidendi

The landlord cannot raise a new plea regarding furnished tenancy at the Supreme Court stage, and the evidence establishes that the rent for the house was Rs.40 per month with Rs.30 separately for furniture, which was returned. Therefore, the appellant was not a defaulter and not liable for eviction.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of Allahabad High Court and Revisional Court set aside
  • Eviction decree against appellant quashed