Esheria India Case Law
Sign in
India Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

India Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter India case law

Results update automatically as you type.

India decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Landlord-tenant law

GOVINDAPPA GOUNDER @ GOVINDASAMY (DEAD) versus K. VIJAYAKUMAR AND ORS.

There was no cogent material on record showing the appellants committed acts or negligence destructive of or injurious to the land or crops to bring the case within s.3(2)(b); the Revenue Court erred in mechanically relying on the commissioner’s report and the High Court erred in affirming that order in revision. Given the protective purpose of the Act 1955, eviction is permissible only on cogent and reliable evidence of gross violation; accordingly the High Court’s order and the Revenue Court’s eviction order were set aside and the appellants’ possession protected.

Source excerpt

  • Section 3(2)(b) tamil nadu cultivating tenants protection act, 1955
  • Eviction of cultivating tenants
  • Cutting/pruning of trees
  • Commissioner’s report
  • Beneficial/beneficent construction
  • Revision under section 6-b
Read case analysis
Property law

MOHIT SURESH HARCHANDRAI & ORS. versus HINDUSTAN ORGANIC CHEMICALS LIMITED

An order for ejectment establishes the tenant's liability to pay mesne profits; the High Court's uniform mesne profit rate of Rs.160 per sq.ft. per month for the period of occupation is appropriate on the facts of this case, but the rate of interest awarded by the High Court is reduced to 6% per annum (simple) and the entire sum is to be paid within three months.

Source excerpt

  • Mesne profit
  • Eviction proceedings
  • Interest on mesne profits
  • Delay and pendency in landlord-tenant disputes
  • Maharashtra rent control act 1999 s.3
Read case analysis
Civil procedure

KARAN KAPOOR versus MADHURI KUMAR

The decree and judgment passed by the Trial Court under Order XII Rule 6 CPC, as affirmed by the High Court, could not be sustained because the admissions in the pleadings were not clear and categorical in view of the defendant’s pleaded defenses based on Agreements to Sell (ATS-I, II, III) and part-performance; therefore the discretionary power under Order XII Rule 6 should not have been exercised to decide the suit without permitting a full trial. The matter is remitted to the Trial Court to decide the suit after affording parties opportunity to lead evidence, and the Trial Court must first…

Source excerpt

  • Order xii rule 6 cpc (judgment on admissions)
  • Eviction/possession
  • Agreement to sell (ats)
  • Specific performance
  • Section 53a transfer of property act
  • Registration act section 17(2)
Read case analysis
Arbitration

VIDYA DROLIA AND OTHERS versus DURGA TRADING CORPORATION

Sections 8 and 11 have the same, narrowly limited ambit: courts at the reference/appointment stage may only undertake a restricted, prima facie review of the existence/validity of an arbitration agreement and should refer the matter to arbitration in case of doubt. Judicial interference at that stage is justified only where it is manifestly and ex facie certain that (a) no valid arbitration agreement exists, or (b) the disputes are non-arbitrable under a four-fold test (actions in rem not reducible to in personam, disputes affecting third-party/erga omnes rights or requiring centralized adjud…

Source excerpt

  • Arbitrability
  • Jurisdiction
  • Separability
  • Competence-competence
  • Prima facie review
  • Interpretation of arbitration agreement
Read case analysis
Landlord-tenant law

HARBANS KAUR versus IQBAL SINGH & ANR.

The tenant was in default because he did not pay the agreed monthly rent of Rs.16,564/- for the demanded period after enactment of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001. The tenant could not unilaterally recalculate and pay a lower rent based on Section 6; the agreed rent before the Act continued unless revised according to the procedure under Sections 6 and 14. The landlord's demand for arrears was as per the amount agreed and not with 10% annual increase; tenant’s default justified eviction under Section 9.

Source excerpt

  • Rent control
  • Arrears of rent
  • Eviction
  • Statutory interpretation
Read case analysis
Property law

DR. H. K. SHARMA versus SHRI RAM LAL

The execution of the agreement to sell the suit house did not result in determination or surrender of the tenancy since the agreement contained no express or implied provision for surrender. Thus, landlord-tenant relationship continued, making the eviction application maintainable. The High Court's factual finding of bona fide need stands.

Source excerpt

  • Eviction
  • Lease surrender
  • Bona fide requirement
  • Agreement to sell
  • Maintainability of eviction applications
Read case analysis
Property law

UNION OF INDIA versus NARESHKUMAR BADRIKUMAR JAGAD & ORS.

By operation of the amended Section 3 of the 1995 Act (w.e.f. 1st April, 1994), statutory or protected tenancy rights in the suit property vest in the Central Government, rendering the decree and undertakings against NTC unenforceable. The Trust (landlord) must seek remedy against the Central Government as per relevant rent legislation for possession of the suit property.

Source excerpt

  • Retrospective legislation
  • Enforceability of decrees
  • Nationalisation of textile undertakings
  • Tenant rights
  • Remedy against statutory tenant
Read case analysis
Civil procedure

OM PRAKASH AGARWAL SINCE DECEASED THR. LRS. & ORS. versus VISHAN DAYAL RAJPOOT & ANR.

Although the Additional District Judge was not legally competent to try a small causes suit with a valuation below Rs.1 lakh after the amendment increasing the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Small Causes Court, the failure of the defendants to object to such jurisdiction at the trial precluded them from raising the objection in revision under Section 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and therefore, interference by the High Court on this ground was unwarranted.

Source excerpt

  • Jurisdiction
  • Pecuniary jurisdiction of courts
  • Eviction
  • Small causes courts
  • Interpretation of statutes
Read case analysis
Landlord-tenant law

ATMA RAM PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. versus THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

Rent Act is a special enactment with a non-obstante clause restricting eviction rights; NDMC Act does not override Rent Act provisions. Property tax recoverable from tenant under NDMC Act cannot be included as part of rent for purposes of eviction under the Rent Act. Such recoverable tax cannot be used to circumvent protection given to tenants under the Rent Act.

Source excerpt

  • Eviction
  • Property tax
  • Statutory interpretation
  • Delhi rent control act
  • New delhi municipal council act
Read case analysis
Civil procedure

HAMEED KUNJU versus NAZIM

High Court erred in entertaining writ petition under Article 227 challenging orders already amenable to appeal, and erred by remanding case with directions to trial court to allow tenant's applications; eviction decree was already executed, litigation ended, respondent had opportunity to contest, and High Court's orders were without jurisdiction.

Source excerpt

  • Eviction
  • Supervisory jurisdiction under article 227
  • Alternative remedy
  • Rent control
  • Abuse of process
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

India decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.