Supreme Court: After the BNSS, a Pre-Cognizance Hearing is Mandatory in PMLA Cases  ||  SC: Landowners Cannot be Forced to Waive Statutory Compensation to Claim Other Benefits  ||  Supreme Court: Banks are Lenient With Big Borrowers But Strict With Ordinary Loan Applicants  ||  Delhi HC: Minimum Wages During Pending Litigation Cannot be Frozen and Must be Updated Periodically  ||  Kerala HC: ICC Can Probe Sexual Harassment Complaint Against a Director Not Controlling Affairs  ||  Delhi HC: Interim Protection From Blacklisting Does Not Remove Bidder’s Duty to Disclose in Tenders  ||  Allahabad HC: After the BNSS, Pre-Cognizance Hearing of the Accused is Mandatory in NDPS Complaints  ||  Delhi HC: Husband Cannot Avoid Maintenance For Wife and Children by Claiming Irregular Income  ||  SC: Repeated Anticipatory Bail Pleas Abuse Process and Reduce Litigation to a Gamble  ||  Supreme Court: State Officers Cannot Back Litigants Through Affidavits Against the Law    

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