SC: Under RTE Act, States Cannot Justify Low Teacher Pay by Citing Centre’s Failure to Release Funds  ||  Supreme Court: While a Child’s Welfare is Paramount, It is Not the Sole Factor in Custody Disputes  ||  Supreme Court: High Court Cannot Reject a Plaint While Exercising Jurisdiction under Article 227  ||  SC: Merely Leasing an Apartment Does Not Bar a Flat Buyer’s Consumer Complaint Against the Builder  ||  Delhi HC: Unproven Adultery Allegations Cannot be Used to Deny Interim Maintenance under the DV Act  ||  Bombay HC: Storing Items in a Fridge isn’t Manufacturing and Doesn’t Make Premises a Factory  ||  Kerala HC: Disability Pension is Not Payable if the Condition is Unrelated to Military Service  ||  Supreme Court: Award Valid Even If Passed After Mandate Expiry When Court Extends Time  ||  Jharkhand HC: Regular Bail Plea During Interim Bail is Not Maintainable under Section 483 BNSS  ||  Cal HC: Theft Claims and Public Humiliation Alone Don’t Amount To Abetment of Suicide U/S 306 IPC    

Surabhi Gehlot and Ors. v. Swarn Kanta Punj - (High Court of Delhi) (18 Sep 2015)

Right to park vehicle not reasonably necessary for enjoyment of tenancy

MANU/DE/2713/2015

Tenancy

In a case where the Plaintiff had raised dispute to the Defendants’ installation of a gate that prevented her from parking her car, the Court held it irrelevant how long she had been parking her car. Having failed to satisfy the requirements of a dominant and servient heritage, the Plaintiff did not have an easementary right of way, let alone an easementary right of parking. Further, the right to park was a valuable right that, unless expressly stated in the lease, could not be assumed. The Court determined that though the right to park a car was not reasonably necessary, Plaintiff’s right to walk over the disputed land was a necessity for the enjoyment of her tenancy.

Relevant : Chapsibai Dhanjibai v. Purushottam MANU/SC/0564/1971 Jeenab Ali v. Allabuddin, MANU/WB/0185/1896 Haji Abdulla Harron v. Municipal Corporation, Karachi MANU/SN/0017/1938

Tags : TENANCY   EASEMENT   PARK   VEHICLE   NECESSARY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved