Civil Appeal No. 565 Of 2005. Case: Seshambal (Dead) Through L.Rs. Vs M/S Chelur Corp. Chelur Building & Ors.. Supreme Court (India)
| Case Number | Civil Appeal No. 565 Of 2005 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv., Neha S. Verma, P.B. Subramanyan, Abhishek Kaushik and V. Mohan, Advs. and For Respondents: L. Nageswara Rao, Sr. Adv., Roy Abraham, Seema Jain and Himinder Lal, Advs. |
| Judges | Markandey Katju,T.S. Thakur, JJ. |
| Issue | Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control Act), 1965 - Section 11(3) |
| Citation | AIR 2010 SC 1521, JT 2010 (2) SC 260, 2010 (1) KLT 834 (SC), (2010) 3 MLJ 174 (SC), RLW 2010 (1)SC 848, 2010 (2) SCALE 414, (2010) 3 SCC 470, 2010 (2) UJ 1035 (SC) |
| Judgement Date | Wednesday February 17, 2010 |
| Court | Supreme Court (India) |
|
|
Judgment T.S. Thakur, J. 1. This appeal by Special Leave arises out of an order passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam whereby C.R.P. No.558 of 1994 has been dismissed and the orders passed by the Rent Controller and the Rent Control Appellate Authority dismissing the eviction petition filed against the tenant wife affirmed. In a nutshell, the facts giving rise to the controversy are as under: 2. Late Shri K. Sachindanda Iyer and his wife late Smt. A Sheshambal Sachindanda Iyer owners of the premises in dispute let out the same to respondent No.1 for a period of three years in terms of a lease dated 12th April, 1983. On the expiry of the lease period the owners filed RCP No.116 of 1986 before the Rent Controller at Ernakulam seeking eviction of the tenant-occupant on the ground that they required the same for their bona fide personal occupation within the meaning of Section 11(3) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control Act), 1965. The prayer for eviction was opposed by the tenant, inter alia, on the ground that the owners did not require the demised premises and that the tenant would find it difficult to shift its business to any other premises on account of non-availability of a suitable accommodation for being so. The Rent Controller eventually came to the conclusion that the owners had failed to establish their bona fide requirement of premises. The Rent Controller held that the owners had shifted their residence from < xml:namespace prefix = st1 /> 3. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Rent Controller, the owners appealed to the Appellate Authority who affirmed the decision taken by the Rent Controller holding that the owners were residing with their daughter and son-in-law at Ernakulam in a building owned by the owners. The Appellate Authority also found that the owners had a cottage at Kodaikanal and that being fairly old had no reason to shift back to Ernakulam in search of better medical facilities especially when their own son-in-law was running a nursing home at 4. Aggrieved by the orders passed by the Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority the owners brought up the matter before the High Court of Kerala in a revision with a view to have the concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below set aside. The High Court, as noted earlier, has refused to intervene in the matter and dismissed the revision petition. The High Court held that it was not expected to reappraise the evidence produced by the parties in the exercise of its revisional jurisdiction and that the limited question that fell for its consideration was whether the procedure followed by the Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority was illegal, irregular or improper. The High Court noted that the rent of the premises paid by the tenant had not been revised since the year 1973. The same was, therefore, enhanced to Rs.10,000/- p.m. w.e.f. 1.11.2003 onwards with liberty to the parties to approach the competent Court for fixation of fair rent for the demised premises. The present appeal, as seen earlier, calls in question the correctness of the above orders. 5. It is not in dispute that during the pendency of the revision petition before the High Court the landlord Shri K. Sachindanda Iyer passed away on 24th April, 1996 leaving behind his wife Smt. A. Sheshambal Sachindanda Iyer as the sole revision petitioner seeking eviction of the respondent- tenant. Consequent upon the dismissal of the revision petition the present appeal was filed by Smt. A. Sheshambal Sachindanda Iyer alone who too passed away before this appeal could be heard for final disposal. IA No.7/2008 filed on 14th November, 2008... |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
F.A. No. 43 of 2004. Case: Girija Shankar Vs Smt. Sheela Devi and others. Chhattisgarh High Court
...and another v. Attharunnisa Begum S. (2010) 2 SCC 619, Sheshambal (dead) through L.Rs. v. Chelur Corporation Chelur Building and others (2010) 3 SCC 470, and P. Veerappa v. M.A. Mohammad Amaunullah. (1996) 1 SCC Per contra, supporting the judgment and decree impugned, Smt. Fouzia Mirza, lea......
-
F. A. No. 43 of 2004. Case: Girija Shankar Vs Smt. Sheela Devi. Chhattisgarh High Court
...Begum S., (2010) 2 SCC 619: AIR 2010 SC (Supp) 670, Sheshambal (dead) through L.Rs. v. Chelur Corporation Chelur Building and others, (2010) 3 SCC 470: AIR 2010 SC 1521 and P. Veerappa v. M.A. Mohammad Amannullah, 1996 (1) SCC 415: AIR 1996 SC Per contra, supporting the judgment and decree ......
-
CS (OS) 2777/2014, I.A. Nos. 17728, 17729 and 17730/2014. Case: Subhash Chandra Vs Positiv Television (P) Ltd.. High Court of Delhi (India)
... ... the order of this Court passed in Company Appeal No.25/2014 filed by defendant No.1 against the ... Rajendra Singh, (2000) 3 SCC 581, the Supreme Court observed that "Fraud and justice can never ... Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath and Ors., AIR 1994 SC 853, wherein it was held that the ... that in the present case the defendants through their TV channels are broadcasting news ... SCC 698 ... Sheshambal v. Chelur Corporation Chelur Building, (2010) 3 SCC 470 ... ...
-
C.R.P.--736/1986. Case: SMT. SAVITRI SETH AND ORS. Vs. SHRI PARSHOTTAM DASS. High Court of Delhi (India)
...Vs. Nalin Narsi Vohra & Ors (1991) 3 SCC 483 and Sheshambal (Dead) Through LRs. Vs. Chelur Corporation Chelur Building and Others (2010) 3 SCC 470 and though there is no dispute to the proposition of that subsequent events can be considered as stated therein, however, it only certain su......
-
F.A. No. 43 of 2004. Case: Girija Shankar Vs Smt. Sheela Devi and others. Chhattisgarh High Court
...and another v. Attharunnisa Begum S. (2010) 2 SCC 619, Sheshambal (dead) through L.Rs. v. Chelur Corporation Chelur Building and others (2010) 3 SCC 470, and P. Veerappa v. M.A. Mohammad Amaunullah. (1996) 1 SCC Per contra, supporting the judgment and decree impugned, Smt. Fouzia Mirza, lea......
-
F. A. No. 43 of 2004. Case: Girija Shankar Vs Smt. Sheela Devi. Chhattisgarh High Court
...Begum S., (2010) 2 SCC 619: AIR 2010 SC (Supp) 670, Sheshambal (dead) through L.Rs. v. Chelur Corporation Chelur Building and others, (2010) 3 SCC 470: AIR 2010 SC 1521 and P. Veerappa v. M.A. Mohammad Amannullah, 1996 (1) SCC 415: AIR 1996 SC Per contra, supporting the judgment and decree ......
-
CS (OS) 2777/2014, I.A. Nos. 17728, 17729 and 17730/2014. Case: Subhash Chandra Vs Positiv Television (P) Ltd.. High Court of Delhi (India)
... ... the order of this Court passed in Company Appeal No.25/2014 filed by defendant No.1 against the ... Rajendra Singh, (2000) 3 SCC 581, the Supreme Court observed that "Fraud and justice can never ... Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath and Ors., AIR 1994 SC 853, wherein it was held that the ... that in the present case the defendants through their TV channels are broadcasting news ... SCC 698 ... Sheshambal v. Chelur Corporation Chelur Building, (2010) 3 SCC 470 ... ...
-
C.R.P.--736/1986. Case: SMT. SAVITRI SETH AND ORS. Vs. SHRI PARSHOTTAM DASS. High Court of Delhi (India)
...Vs. Nalin Narsi Vohra & Ors (1991) 3 SCC 483 and Sheshambal (Dead) Through LRs. Vs. Chelur Corporation Chelur Building and Others (2010) 3 SCC 470 and though there is no dispute to the proposition of that subsequent events can be considered as stated therein, however, it only certain su......
