MAHESH KUMAR AGARWAL (DEAD) BY LRS versus NARESH CHANDRA & ORS.

MAHESH KUMAR AGARWAL (DEAD) BY LRS versus NARESH CHANDRA & ORS.

The Supreme Court held that the tenant waived the objection to any defect in the notice by not raising it in the reply, written statement or on appeal; accordingly the Rent Controller's eviction order (as affirmed by the appellate authority) was restored, subject to the second proviso to Section 21 requiring compensation for non-residential premises, and the appellants were ordered to pay Rs.30,000 to the respondents.

Parties
Appellant: Mahesh Kumar Agarwal (Dead) by Lrs; Respondent: Naresh Chandra & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
08 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal No.7554 of 2021 / Appeal to the Supreme Court Against High Court Order in Writ Petition; Final Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order set aside; order of the Rent Controller as affirmed by the appellate authority restored with modification.
Legal Topics
Section 21(1)(a) Proviso Six Months' Notice Requirement, Waiver of Statutory Protection/defect in Notice, Compensation for Eviction of Non Residential Premises (second Proviso to Section 21)
U.p. Urban Buildings (regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 Rent and Eviction Law Property Law Section 21(1)(a) Proviso Six Months' Notice Requirement Waiver of Statutory Protection/defect in Notice Compensation for Eviction of Non Residential Premises (second Proviso to Section 21)

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

Parties

Mahesh Kumar Agarwal (Dead) by Lrs

Appellant

Naresh Chandra & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal No.7554 of 2021 / Appeal to the Supreme Court Against High Court Order in Writ Petition; Final Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the landlord complied with the proviso to Section 21(1)(a) requiring notice of not less than six months before filing an eviction application
  2. 2 Whether the tenant waived any objection to a defective notice by failing to raise it in reply, written statement or on appeal
  3. 3 Whether compensation is payable under the second proviso to Section 21 for premises let out exclusively for non-residential purposes

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the tenant waived the objection to any defect in the notice by not raising it in the reply, written statement or on appeal; accordingly the Rent Controller's eviction order (as affirmed by the appellate authority) was restored, subject to the second proviso to Section 21 requiring compensation for non-residential premises, and the appellants were ordered to pay Rs.30,000 to the respondents.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order set aside; order of the Rent Controller as affirmed by the appellate authority restored with modification.

Orders

  • Impugned High Court order dated 03.10.2016 set aside
  • Order of the Rent Controller (as affirmed by the Appellate Authority) restored