Allahabad HC: Employees of Constituent Institutions are not Entitled to Central University Benefits  ||  Calcutta High Court: Juvenile Accused Eligible to Apply for Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 CrPC  ||  J&K & L HC: Departmental Proceedings Not Halted by Pending Criminal Case Without Showing Prejudice  ||  Cal HC: CESTAT Appeals Abate After Resolution Plan Success; CENVAT Reversal Requires No Pre-Deposit  ||  Bom HC: SEBI Settlement Doesn’t Protect Accused from Criminal Liability in Serious Economic Offences  ||  SC Directs States to Notify Eco-Sensitive Zones Around Tiger Reserves and Regulate Tiger Safaris  ||  SC: Its 2024 Order Letting Union Review Benami Act Cases Based on 'Ganpati Dealcom' was Incorrect  ||  SC: Rejection of Income Tax Settlement Application Doesn’t Bar Assessee from Contesting Assessment  ||  SC Informed Accessibility Facilities for Visually Impaired Candidates in AIBE and CLAT Expected Soon  ||  Supreme Court: Pendency of Writ Proceedings Does Not Bar Availing Alternative Statutory Remedies    

Cepco Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Narinder Pal Singh Chawla - (High Court of Delhi) (11 Jul 2016)

Mixed residential, commercial use envisaged in Delhi rent control

MANU/DE/1590/2016

Tenancy

Section 2(l)(iii) of the Delhi Rent Control Act 1958 is applicable in a case where tenancy premises are residential-cum-professional, or vice versa, and the nature of the tenanted premises is primarily residential and no part is purely commercial, the Delhi High Court held.

In the instant case, the Appellant had granted residential tenancy to the deceased. Subsequently, it was discovered that the deceased was using the property in a commercial capacity as well. After his death, deceased’s wife inherited limited tenancy rights in respect of the property.

The court considering precedent in Gian Devi noted that since the dispute involved mixed residential and commercial use, it was not dealt with by the earlier case - which only looked at application of Section 2(1)(iii) of the Act from a commercial perspective. In present appeal, premises was adjudged to be used residentially, serving also a professional purpose - thus not excluding it from the remit of the Act.

Relevant : Gian Devi Anand v. Jeevan Kumar MANU/SC/0381/1985 Kamla Devi v. Satya P. Goel MANU/DE/0388/1986

Tags : RENT CONTROL   INHERITED RIGHTS   RESIDENTIAL   COMMERCIAL USE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved