Latest news with #DelhiRentControlAct
Time of India
10 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
High court sets aside rent controller order citing misuse of Delhi Rent Control Act
New Delhi: Flagging the "egregious misuse" of the Delhi Rent Control Act, the High Court has termed it an "anachronistic piece of legislation" and set aside a rent controller's 2013 order. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambani, in a recent order, was dealing with petitions against the orders of the additional rent controller (ARC) that dismissed eviction petitions filed by owners of properties in Sadar Bazar. The owners are now based in the UK and Dubai and sought eviction of their tenants, but their plea was dismissed by the ARC, which ruled in favour of the tenants. You Can Also Check: Delhi AQI | Weather in Delhi | Bank Holidays in Delhi | Public Holidays in Delhi "This court is compelled to record that while manning the rent control roster, it found that cases abound where very well-off tenants enjoying financial prosperity persist in unjustly occupying premises for decades on end, paying a pittance for rent, while in the process their landlords are forced into impecunious and desperate circumstances, resulting from egregious misuse of an anachronistic piece of legislation, namely the Delhi Rent Control Act," HC noted in its verdict. Allowing the plea of the petitioners to evict the tenants, the court saw merit in the grounds cited by the petitioners for seeking eviction of tenants from the premises on the ground that they run two restaurants in London and require the space for expanding the business in India. The ARC denied the eviction, noting that the petitioners were settled in and were running their businesses in London and Dubai, and did not require the premises for their "subsistence or survival," and that their bona fide requirement did not amount to being an "actual need. " It also said the premises were too small to run a sit-in restaurant from. Taking a dim view of such reasoning, HC set aside the ARC's eviction order and said, "the financial well-being of a landlord, or the financial ill-health of a tenant, were not relevant considerations while deciding an eviction petition." It observed that whether "they can run a full-fledged, sit-down restaurant or a smaller food take-away joint is entirely the petitioners' prerogative; and the bona fides of their requirement cannot be discounted based merely on the learned ARC's assessment of whether a food business can be run from the subject premises. This view taken by the ARC is flawed." In 2019, the High Court rejected a constitutional challenge to certain provisions of the rent control law governing parts of Delhi. An appeal against the same is pending before the Supreme Court. |
Time of India
21 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
Delhi Rent Control Act anachronistic legislation: Delhi HC
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High court has called the Delhi Rent Control Act an "anachronistic piece of legislation" the "egregious" misuse of which has forced property owners into desperate circumstances as well-off tenants "unjustly occupy premises for decades on-end". Justice Anup Jairam Bhambani was hearing petitions against the 2013 orders of the additional rent controller (ARC) that dismissed eviction petitions of the UK and Dubai-based owners of a property in Sadar Bazar and ruled in favour of tenants. "This court is compelled to record that while manning the Rent Control Roster it has found that cases abound where very well-off tenants enjoying financial prosperity persist in unjustly occupying premises for decades on-end, paying pittance for rent, while in the process their landlords are forced into impecunious and desperate circumstances, resulting from egregious misuse of an anachronistic piece of legislation, namely the Delhi Rent Control Act," the court said. The high court, as a result, allowed the petitioners to evict the tenants. The petitioners sought the eviction of the premises on the ground that they run two restaurants in London and require the space for expanding the business in India. The ARC had denied the eviction, noting that the petitioners were settled-in and were running their businesses in London and Dubai, and did not require the premises for their "subsistence or survival", and that their bona fide requirement did not amount to being an "actual need". It also said the premises were too small to run a sit-in restaurant from. The high court set aside the eviction order and said "the financial wellbeing of a landlord, or the financial ill-health of a tenant, were not relevant considerations while deciding an eviction petition under section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act". The court further said whether the petitioners were able to run a full-fledged, sit-down restaurant or a smaller food takeaway vend was entirely their prerogative.
The Hindu
a day ago
- Business
- The Hindu
Delhi Rent Control Act an anachronistic legislation: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has called the Delhi Rent Control Act an 'anachronistic piece of legislation', the 'egregious' misuse of which has forced property owners into desperate circumstances as well-off tenants 'unjustly occupy premises for decades on-end'. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambani made the observation while hearing petitions against a 2013 order of the Additional Rent Controller (ARC) that dismissed eviction petitions of the owners of a property in Sadar Bazar and ruled in favour of the tenants. 'This court is compelled to record that while manning the Rent Control Roster, it has found that cases abound where very well-off tenants enjoying financial prosperity persist in unjustly occupying premises for decades on-end, paying pittance for rent, while in the process their landlords are forced into impecunious and desperate circumstances, resulting from egregious misuse of an anachronistic piece of legislation, namely the Delhi Rent Control Act,' the court said in the July 2 judgment. The owners sought the eviction of the tenants on the ground that they run two restaurants in London and require the space for expanding the business in India. As per the owners, the premises are presently fetching paltry rents of ₹40 per month each. The premises have been in the occupation of the tenants for more than 50 years. The ARC had denied the eviction, noting that the petitioners were settled-in and were running their businesses in London and Dubai, and did not require the premises for their 'subsistence or survival'. The ARC had also concluded that given the measurements of the subject premises, a restaurant cannot be run from those premises alone. The court, however, said whether the owners are 'able to run a full-fledged, sit-down restaurant or a smaller food take-away vend is entirely the petitioners' prerogative; and the bona-fidés of their requirement cannot be discounted based merely on the learned ARC's assessment of whether a food business can be run from the subject premises'. The court set aside the ARC's decision. 'Consequently, the eviction petitions are allowed and the petitioners are entitled to evict the respondents from the subject premises and obtain vacant, physical possession thereof, in accordance with law,' the court said.
The Print
2 days ago
- Business
- The Print
Delhi Rent Control Act anachronistic legislation: Delhi HC
'This court is compelled to record that while manning the Rent Control Roster it has found that cases abound where very well-off tenants enjoying financial prosperity persist in unjustly occupying premises for decades on-end, paying pittance for rent, while in the process their landlords are forced into impecunious and desperate circumstances, resulting from egregious misuse of an anachronistic piece of legislation, namely the Delhi Rent Control Act,' the court said. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambani was hearing petitions against the 2013 orders of the additional rent controller (ARC) that dismissed eviction petitions of the UK and Dubai-based owners of a property in Sadar Bazar and ruled in favour of tenants. New Delhi, Jul 3 (PTI) The Delhi High court has called the Delhi Rent Control Act an 'anachronistic piece of legislation' the 'egregious' misuse of which has forced property owners into desperate circumstances as well-off tenants 'unjustly occupy premises for decades on-end'. The high court, as a result, allowed the petitioners to evict the tenants. The petitioners sought the eviction of the premises on the ground that they run two restaurants in London and require the space for expanding the business in India. The ARC had denied the eviction, noting that the petitioners were settled-in and were running their businesses in London and Dubai, and did not require the premises for their 'subsistence or survival', and that their bona fide requirement did not amount to being an 'actual need'. It also said the premises were too small to run a sit-in restaurant from. The high court set aside the eviction order and said 'the financial wellbeing of a landlord, or the financial ill-health of a tenant, were not relevant considerations while deciding an eviction petition under section 14(1)(e) of the DRC Act'. The court further said whether the petitioners were able to run a full-fledged, sit-down restaurant or a smaller food takeaway vend was entirely their prerogative. PTI UK UK AMK AMK This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
