SUBHASH CHAND versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

SUBHASH CHAND versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

Respondent No.4 had sufficient cause for non-payment of rent due to pending claim of occupancy rights, and deposited the rent once the claim was denied. Therefore, not liable to ejectment under Section 9(1)(ii) of the 1953 Act.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Subhash Chand; Respondent: State of Haryana & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
16 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench of Punjab & Haryana High Court Decision in Civil Writ Petition No.3733 of 2002
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Tenant Eviction, Arrears of Rent, Occupancy Rights, Procedure Under Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953
Land Law Agricultural Tenancy Tenant Eviction Arrears of Rent Occupancy Rights Procedure Under Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Subhash Chand

Appellant

State of Haryana & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench of Punjab & Haryana High Court Decision in Civil Writ Petition No.3733 of 2002

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondent No.4 was liable to be ejected under Section 9(1)(ii) of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 for non-payment of rent
  2. 2 Whether notice in Form 'N' was required prior to ejectment under Section 14-A(ii) of the Act
  3. 3 Whether the application was maintainable as per procedural rules

Ratio Decidendi

Respondent No.4 had sufficient cause for non-payment of rent due to pending claim of occupancy rights, and deposited the rent once the claim was denied. Therefore, not liable to ejectment under Section 9(1)(ii) of the 1953 Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No costs