TARA CHAND AND ANR. versus RAM PRASAD

TARA CHAND AND ANR. versus RAM PRASAD

Tenancy rights under the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 are heritable; upon the death of the tenant, her heirs succeed to both the business and tenancy rights and are entitled to statutory protection under the Act. The Amendment Act does not retroactively divest vested rights. The appellants, as Class I heirs, succeeded to the leasehold interest and may be evicted only in accordance with the Act.

Parties
Appellant: Tara Chand; Appellant: Nand Kishore; Respondent: Ram Prasad
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
03 May 1990
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; decree and judgment of High Court reversed; trial court decree restored; suit for ejectment dismissed.
Legal Topics
Heritability of Tenancy Rights, Statutory Tenancy, Effect of Amendments to Rent Control Legislation
Landlord Tenant Law Succession Law Heritability of Tenancy Rights Statutory Tenancy Effect of Amendments to Rent Control Legislation

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tara Chand

Appellant

Nand Kishore

Appellant

Ram Prasad

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether tenancy rights under the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 are heritable
  2. 2 Whether the heirs of the tenant are entitled to statutory protection against eviction after the tenant's death

Ratio Decidendi

Tenancy rights under the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 are heritable; upon the death of the tenant, her heirs succeed to both the business and tenancy rights and are entitled to statutory protection under the Act. The Amendment Act does not retroactively divest vested rights. The appellants, as Class I heirs, succeeded to the leasehold interest and may be evicted only in accordance with the Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; decree and judgment of High Court reversed; trial court decree restored; suit for ejectment dismissed.

Orders

  • Appellants are entitled to remain in possession until eviction under the Act; each party to bear own costs.