REHMAN JEO WANGNOO versus RAM CHAND AND ORS.

REHMAN JEO WANGNOO versus RAM CHAND AND ORS.

Courts are obliged, under the second proviso to the Explanation to s. 11(1)(h), to consider after evidence whether partial eviction is appropriate, regardless of whether there is a specific pleading; absence of such pleading does not prevent compliance with the statute.

Parties
Appellant: Rehman Jeo Wangnoo; Respondents: Ram Chand and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
07 December 1977
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Remand After Appeal by Special Leave
Outcome
Appeal allowed, matter remanded to first appellate court
Legal Topics
Eviction, Partial Eviction, Statutory Interpretation
Property Law Landlord Tenant Eviction Partial Eviction Statutory Interpretation

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rehman Jeo Wangnoo

Appellant

Ram Chand and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Remand After Appeal by Special Leave

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second proviso to the Explanation to Section 11(1)(h) of the Jammu and Kashmir Houses and Shops Rent Control Act, 1966, mandates courts to consider partial eviction without specific pleading
  2. 2 Whether the absence of specific pleading under the said proviso disables the court from exploring partial eviction

Ratio Decidendi

Courts are obliged, under the second proviso to the Explanation to s. 11(1)(h), to consider after evidence whether partial eviction is appropriate, regardless of whether there is a specific pleading; absence of such pleading does not prevent compliance with the statute.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed, matter remanded to first appellate court

Orders

  • Delay condoned
  • Special leave granted