M/S. JEEVAN DIESELS & ELECTRICALS LTD. versus M/S JASBIR SINGH CHADHA (HUF) & ANR.

M/S. JEEVAN DIESELS & ELECTRICALS LTD. versus M/S JASBIR SINGH CHADHA (HUF) & ANR.

There was no clear and unequivocal admission by the appellant regarding the termination of tenancy in pleadings or replies, hence, trial court and High Court orders under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC could not be sustained and must be set aside.

Parties
Appellant: Jeevan Diesels & Electricals Ltd.; Respondent: Jasbir Singh Chadha (HUF); Respondent: Anr.; Anil Kaushik; Gopal Singh Chauhan; Neha S. Verma; Shiv Prakash Pandey
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
07 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment in RFA No. 465 of 2008, Delhi; Order of Additional District Judge; Supreme Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; orders of High Court and Additional District Judge set aside; matter remanded to trial court for expeditious disposal.
Legal Topics
Judgment on Admission, Order 12 Rule 6 CPC, Termination of Tenancy, Suit for Possession
Civil Procedure Landlord Tenant Judgment on Admission Order 12 Rule 6 CPC Termination of Tenancy Suit for Possession

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 1 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jeevan Diesels & Electricals Ltd.

Appellant

Jasbir Singh Chadha (HUF)

Respondent

Anr.

Respondent

Anil Kaushik

Gopal Singh Chauhan

Neha S. Verma

Shiv Prakash Pandey

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment in RFA No. 465 of 2008, Delhi; Order of Additional District Judge; Supreme Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a clear and unequivocal admission by the tenant regarding termination of tenancy as required under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC
  2. 2 Whether the trial court and High Court correctly decreed dispossession based on alleged admission in pleadings

Ratio Decidendi

There was no clear and unequivocal admission by the appellant regarding the termination of tenancy in pleadings or replies, hence, trial court and High Court orders under Order 12 Rule 6 CPC could not be sustained and must be set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; orders of High Court and Additional District Judge set aside; matter remanded to trial court for expeditious disposal.

Orders

  • The judgments of the High Court and the Additional District Judge are set aside.
  • The matter is remanded to the trial court for expeditious disposal as early as possible, preferably within six months from date of service of this order.