SRI RAM PASRICHA versus JAGANNATH & ORS.

SRI RAM PASRICHA versus JAGANNATH & ORS.

A co-owner landlord is 'the owner' within the meaning of section 13(1)(f) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act 1956 and can maintain a suit for eviction without impleading other co-owners. The tenant is estopped from denying the landlord's title under section 116 of the Evidence Act. Jurisprudentially, a co-owner owns every part of the property along with others and is not merely a part or fractional owner unless partition occurs.

Parties
Appellant: SRI RAM PASRICHA; Respondent: JAGANNATH; Respondent: Respondent No. 2
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
24 August 1976
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Certificate From Calcutta High Court, Letters Patent Appeal No. 74/74
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Co Ownership Eviction, Landlord Tenant Relationship, Estoppel of Tenant, Title in Eviction Suits

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SRI RAM PASRICHA

Appellant

JAGANNATH

Respondent

Respondent No. 2

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Certificate From Calcutta High Court, Letters Patent Appeal No. 74/74

  1. 1 Whether a landlord who is a co-owner is the 'owner' under section 13(1)(f) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act 1956.
  2. 2 Whether a tenant can deny the landlord's title under section 116 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872.
  3. 3 Whether one co-owner can file a suit for eviction without impleading other co-owners.

Ratio Decidendi

A co-owner landlord is 'the owner' within the meaning of section 13(1)(f) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act 1956 and can maintain a suit for eviction without impleading other co-owners. The tenant is estopped from denying the landlord's title under section 116 of the Evidence Act. Jurisprudentially, a co-owner owns every part of the property along with others and is not merely a part or fractional owner unless partition occurs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order as to costs