KRISHNAWATI versus HANS RAJ

KRISHNAWATI versus HANS RAJ

There was no substantial question of law in the second appeal; the High Court erred in interfering with the concurrent findings of the rent control authorities. The evidence did not establish subletting but only that appellant and Sohan Singh lived as husband and wife. The burden to prove subletting was on the landlord, which was not discharged.

Parties
Appellant: Krishnawati; Respondent: Hans Raj
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
29 November 1973
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Decision in Second Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Subletting, Eviction, Burden of Proof, Mixed Question of Law and Fact
Property Law Tenancy Law Subletting Eviction Burden of Proof Mixed Question of Law and Fact

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

Parties

Krishnawati

Appellant

Hans Raj

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Decision in Second Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellant sublet the shop premises to Sohan Singh
  2. 2 Whether High Court could interfere with concurrent findings of fact under section 39(2) of the Delhi Rent Control Act
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's status as wife of Sohan Singh was a substantial question of law

Ratio Decidendi

There was no substantial question of law in the second appeal; the High Court erred in interfering with the concurrent findings of the rent control authorities. The evidence did not establish subletting but only that appellant and Sohan Singh lived as husband and wife. The burden to prove subletting was on the landlord, which was not discharged.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of High Court set aside
  • Order of Rent Control Authorities restored