JAMNALAL AND ORS. versus RADHESHYAM
In absence of a dispute regarding rate of rent, Section 13(2) is not attracted even if there is a dispute regarding arrears; Section 13(1) remains operative and the tenant must deposit arrears as well as future rent or be liable to eviction under Section 12(1)(a) and Section 13(6).
- Parties
- Appellant: JAMNALAL AND ORS.; Respondent: RADHESHYAM
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 18 April 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order Dated 16.12.1997 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in S.a. No. 183 of 1993
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Eviction, Arrears of Rent, Summary Inquiry, Tenant Default, M.p. Accommodation Control Act
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
JAMNALAL AND ORS.
Appellant
RADHESHYAM
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order Dated 16.12.1997 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in S.a. No. 183 of 1993
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a decree for eviction can be passed without first determining provisionally the amount of rent payable under Section 13(2) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961, when the tenant, having admitted the rate of rent, failed to establish payment of arrears.
Ratio Decidendi
In absence of a dispute regarding rate of rent, Section 13(2) is not attracted even if there is a dispute regarding arrears; Section 13(1) remains operative and the tenant must deposit arrears as well as future rent or be liable to eviction under Section 12(1)(a) and Section 13(6).
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- Impugned order of the High Court dated 16.12.1997 is set aside.
- Eviction petition filed by the appellants is allowed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment