Ownership under rent act
TRIBHUVAN PUROHIT
(Querist) 27 January 2012
This query is : Resolved
This is with reference to my earlier query regarding ownership.
I am explaining my query in very simple concept.
I have my trader friend had given part of his premises to his friend on humanitarian ground.
There are no agreements made, no demand notice / rent receipt had been given to him.
He does not have any document except shops and estblishment certificate.
He does not have paid any dues pertaining property to any government body, all are paid by my friend.
The so called "trace passer" as i can say claiming his ownership under Rent Act?
How one can do this
What are the provisions under Rent Act where we can get the premises vacated from the person with whom we have not made any agreement nor he has been paying any statutory dues.
Kindly explain & help.
Thanking You,
Tribhuvan Purohit
ajay sethi
(Expert) 27 January 2012
issue him a legal notice . file suit for eviction and for recovery of posession .
ajay sethi
(Expert) 27 January 2012
please note that since trespasser is not a tenant you will have to file suit in civil court for posession.
Hon‟ble Supreme Court in “Abdullah Bin Ali & Ors. Vs. Gallappa & Ors.”, 1985 (2) SCC 54
There is no denying the fact that the allegations made in the plaint decide the forum. The jurisdiction does not depend upon the defence taken by the defendants in the written statement. On a reading of theplaint as a whole it is evident that the plaintiffs-appellants had filed the suit giving rise to the present appeal treating the defendants as trespassers as they denied the title of the plaintiffs-appellants. Now a suit against the trespasser would lie only in the civil court and not in the revenue court. The High Court, however, took the view that the plaintiffs-appellants had not claimed a declaration of title over the disputed plots and all that has been set up by them in the plaint is the relationship of landlord and tenant. 6. In our opinion the High Court was not quite correct in observing that the suit was filed by the plaintiffs-appellants on the basis of relationship of landlord and tenant. Indeed, when the defendants denied the title of the plaintiffs and the tenancy the plaintiffs filed the present suit treating them to be trespassers and the suit is not on the basis of the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. It is no doubt true that the plaintiffs had alleged that the defendant No. 2 was a tenant but on the denial of the tenancy and the title of the plaintiffs-appellants they filed a suit treating the defendant to be a trespasser and a suit against a trespasser would lie only in the civil court and not in the revenue court
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 27 January 2012
#Sethi!
Neither the citation nor the explanation made therein relates to the present query of the author so there is no use to confuse a layman. The authority cited by you pertains to territorial jurisdiction for filing the case.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 27 January 2012
In the given case, your friend should serve a legal notice to the illegal occupier to vacate the premises within a stipulated time failing which file a suit for possession with demand of 10 times mesne profits/rent as is pravelent in that area.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 29 January 2012
friend???
really a style i dislike !
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 29 January 2012
Ajay Sethi has a point, can do as directed.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 29 January 2012
mr makkad authority cited by me pertains to issue whether civil court or courts under rent act have jursidction in case of an trespasser who is not a tenant .
in present case admiiteldy it is a trespasser . application for eviction will have to be made before civil court only
