SHRI KISHAN @ KRISHAN KUMAR ETC. ETC. versus MANOJ KUMAR ETC. ETC.

SHRI KISHAN @ KRISHAN KUMAR ETC. ETC. versus MANOJ KUMAR ETC. ETC.

Civil courts retain jurisdiction to hear and enforce suits for possession instituted during the statutory exemption period under Section 1(3) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973, even if decrees are passed after the moratorium ends. No provision in the Act deprives the court of such jurisdiction or prevents execution of such decrees. The statutory purpose of encouraging construction would be defeated if otherwise.

Parties
Appellant: Kishan@ Krishan Kumar; Respondent: Manoj Kumar; Appellant: Appellant in C.A. No. 357/91
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 February 1998
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Disposition, Supreme Court
Outcome
appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Civil Courts, Exemption Clauses, Execution of Decrees, Interpretation of Statutes
Landlord Tenant Rent Control Statutory Interpretation Jurisdiction of Civil Courts Exemption Clauses Execution of Decrees Interpretation of Statutes

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kishan@ Krishan Kumar

Appellant

Manoj Kumar

Respondent

Appellant in C.A. No. 357/91

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Disposition, Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973 bars civil courts from passing or executing decrees for possession after the expiry of the statutory moratorium period
  2. 2 Whether tenancy protection applies to tenants after the ten-year exemption period for new buildings has expired

Ratio Decidendi

Civil courts retain jurisdiction to hear and enforce suits for possession instituted during the statutory exemption period under Section 1(3) of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973, even if decrees are passed after the moratorium ends. No provision in the Act deprives the court of such jurisdiction or prevents execution of such decrees. The statutory purpose of encouraging construction would be defeated if otherwise.

Court Disposition

appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed. No order as to costs.