SC: Appeal U/S 374 CrPC/415 BNSS is Not Maintainable Against Sessions Court's Reversal of Acquittal  ||  SC Asked the Centre to Promote Awareness About the Consequences of Driving With an Expired Licence  ||  SC Explains How a Deceased Christian Wife's Property Devolves under the Indian Succession Act  ||  Supreme Court: Reach Stacker isn't a Motor Vehicle; MACT Claim Not Maintainable  ||  Supreme Court: Lift Makers, Operators and Owners Share Responsibility for User Safety  ||  Patna HC: Pressure to Sign Divorce and Child Custody does not Amount to Cruelty  ||  Bombay HC: Externment under the Police Act Requires Satisfaction About a Gang's Activities  ||  Bombay HC: False Travel Distance Claim Alone Doesn't Constitute Misappropriation  ||  J&K&L High Court: Interest on Delayed Gratuity is Not a Mandatory Pre-Deposit For an Appeal  ||  Meghalaya HC: Meritorious Candidate Cannot Be Denied Admission For a Two-Minute Delay    

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 2026 - All Rights Reserved