JOGINDER KUMAR BUTAN versus R.P. OBEROI
In the absence of factual material to show abuse or misuse of s. 21, permission granted under the section cannot be held to have been obtained by fraud. Compliance with s. 21 does not require a separate written lease agreement when statements are made and signed before the Rent Controller. Law settled by the Delhi High Court on the interpretation of local statutes should not be disturbed.
- Parties
- Appellant: Joginder Kumar Butan; Respondent: R.P. Oberoi
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 12 August 1987
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Delhi Rent Control Act, Limited Tenancy, Fraud on Statute, Requirement of Written Lease, Interpretation of Local Statutes
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Joginder Kumar Butan
Appellant
R.P. Oberoi
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether permission obtained under s. 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act for limited tenancy was vitiated by fraud or contravention/abuse of statute
- 2 Whether absence of a written lease agreement invalidated permission under s. 21
Ratio Decidendi
In the absence of factual material to show abuse or misuse of s. 21, permission granted under the section cannot be held to have been obtained by fraud. Compliance with s. 21 does not require a separate written lease agreement when statements are made and signed before the Rent Controller. Law settled by the Delhi High Court on the interpretation of local statutes should not be disturbed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent
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