As web-based media sites publish a woman's allegations of sexual harassment against CJI Ranjan Gogoi, the Supreme Court Secretariat denies all charges and Justice Gogoi recuses himself from passing orders. He says it is a larger conspiracy to destabilize the judiciary

News Snippets

  • BCCI ombudsman fines Hardik Pandya and KL Rahul Rs 20 lakhs each for misogynistic comments on the chat show Koffee With Karan
  • Buzz around BJP fielding Sunny Deol from Amritsar as Amit Shah meets the actor
  • EC bans web series on Modi and asks the channel to take down all content
  • #MeToo reaches Supreme Court. Former junior research assistant levels sexual harassment charges against CJI Ranjan Gogoi
  • In West Bengal, official in charge of EVMs goes missing but EC says it is for personal reasons
  • Mulayam and Mayawati share the stage at Mainpuri to bury 24-year old enmity
  • After nation-wide outrage, Pragya apologizes and says Karkare was a martyr who was killed by enemy bullets
  • BJP says Pragya's statement are her personal views
  • Pragya Thakur, Malegaon blasts accused and BJP candidate from Bhopal, says police officer Hemant Karkare of anti-terror squad, tortured her in jail and was killed in the 26/11 operations due to her "curse"
  • PM Modi defends choice of Pragya Thakur as BJP's contestant from Bhopal
  • India suspends trade across the Line of Control with Pakistan
  • PM Modi says Pak PM Imran Khan tried to influence Indian elections with "reverse swing" by making comments favouring him
  • 66% voting recorded in phase 2. sporadic violence reported from many places, especially West Bengal
  • Election Commission bans chowkidar chor hai campaign in MP
  • BJP workers' son commits suicide by hanging from a tree in West Bengal
landlord-tenants
Landlords Versus Tenants

By Sunil Garodia

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Writes for a number of publications.

In a major ruling that is expected to bring relief to countless landlords fighting eviction cases against their tenants, the Supreme Court has said that it is wrong to doubt the bona fide of a landlord regarding the requirement of the commercial premises sought to be vacated even if the landlord or his family are already engaged in business elsewhere.

In the case Hukum Chandra vs Nemi Chand Jain, the landlord sought eviction of the defendant from his shop as he wanted to settle his son. The trial court dismissed the case as the defendant proved that the landlord’s son was already engaged in business. Citing this as an insufficient ground for eviction, the trial court said that since the son was already engaged in business and was not unemployed, it did not see any need to evict the tenant as there was no bona fide requirement on part of the landlord.

But the 1st appellate court reversed the judgment and clearly stated that it cannot be expected for the landlord’s son to sit idle till the suit was disposed of. The Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld the appellate court’s order, adding that the landlord had proved bona fide requirement.

Aggrieved by high court order, the tenant approached the apex court, only to discover that he stood on shaky ground. The Supreme Court also held that the bona fide cannot be doubted just for the fact that the landlord’s son was already engaged in business. It added that material on record did not show that the said person was engaged in business at the time of filing of the eviction suit.

The court said that “In the present case, mere fact that Rajendra Kumar was involved in the business of utensils – “Rajendra Bartan Bhandar” a bona fide need of the premises cannot be doubted. It would be inappropriate to expect the son of the respondent – landlord to sit idle without doing any work till the eviction petition is decided on the basis of the bona fide requirement. If there is categorical averment by the respondent that the premises are required for his son Rajendra Kumar; engaging in the business of utensils in the meanwhile, cannot be a ground to deny a decree for eviction.”

Although it is true that landlords often create problems for tenants, it is also true that most tenants enjoy prime commercial spaces at piffling rents and always try to avoid eviction by putting forward specious arguments. Earlier, the tenancy laws were in favour of the tenants. But now, given the need for more housing and commercial spaces, the laws have been equitably designed to prevent excesses by both landlords and tenants. This order by the apex court is undoubtedly a shot in the arm for numerous landlords who can now hope to evict tenants faster.

In Depth

holymenandthecurse

Pragya Thakur, Sakshi Maharaj And The Power Of The Curse

Editor's Pick

chowkidar stay alert

Yes, I Would Like My Children To Be Chowkidars

Election Special - National

EC acts

EC Acts To Ban Yogi, Mayawati, Maneka and Azam Khan From Campaigning

Election Special - States

evms and naidu

Who Is Defeating Chandrababu Naidu – Jagan Reddy Or EVMs?

mobiles