NDLI: Abdul Khuddus Vs. H.m. Chandiramani (dead) Thr Lrs. & Ors.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Karnataka Rent Control Act
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7 Referred Case 8 Referred Case 9 Referred Case 10
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 – ss.5 and 21 – Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 – ss. 322 and 462 – Transfer of Property Act – s.108(B)(e) – Plaintiff was inducted as tenant by an allotment order passed by the Rent Controller in a building – Ejectment petition filed on ground of bona fide use by landlord for immediate purpose of demolition and erection of new building – Corporation served notice u/s.322 of the Act citing dilapidated condition of building – The said notice was challenged by filing writ petition in the High Court – High Court dismissed the writ petition with direction to pass final order – Final Order passed by Deputy Commissioner and it directed that if the owner or occupier fails to demolish building within 3 days then action will be taken under the Act – Order served on plaintiff on 6.1.1995 at 5:20 PM and demolition by the Corporation took place on 9.1.1995 at around 9 AM – Order of demolition was not challenged in statutory appeal – Plaintiff filed first suit, seeking mandatory injunction and possession after demolition of building, followed by second suit claiming damages – The trial Court granted decree of the quantified damages – In the first appeal, the High Court held that (i) there was a lack of bona fide in issuing notice u/s.322 of the Act; (ii) there was no order passed u/s. 462 of the Act; (iii) building was demolished in a haste manner without giving clear 3 days notice – Therefore, the plaintiff entitled to possession of premise comparable in size and form with that of rented portion of suit property – On appeal, held: The statutory tenant cannot seek repossession after demolition of building u/s.108(B)(e) of the TP Act as the rights and liabilities of a statutory tenant are to be found under the Rent Act – Since, the premises were situated within the urban areas governed by the Rent Act, the tenant has a right to seek possession only in terms of s.27 of the Act if the decree for eviction was passed by the Court on the ground specified under clause (j) of the proviso to sub-section (1) of s.21 – In the instant case, the petition for eviction filed by the landlord was withdrawn – S.322 of the Act is a self-contained provision which empowers the Commissioner for immediate evacuation of the property – The notice u/s.462 was not required to be issued – The time for complying with the order does not arise in the case of a building which was in a dilapidated condition endangering life of the citizens – Therefore, judgment and decree of the High Court not sustainable – However, as the building was demolished within three days of receipt of notice, appellant directed to compensate the plaintiff with the damages of Rs. 5 lakhs – Order of High Court set aside – Both the suits dismissed. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Or. II, R.2 – A building in a dilapidated condition demolished by the corporation – Plaintiff- tenant filed first suit, seeking mandatory injunction and possession after demolition of building, followed by second suit claiming damages – The High Court held that suit is not barred by the principles of Or.II, R.2 of CPC and cause of action in both the suits was different – Held: Every suit shall include whole of the claim which the plaintiff is entitled to make in respect of the cause of action – The cause of action is a bundle of facts and relief of damages is construed to be a component of such bundle of facts – The plaintiff filed first suit after demolition of the building, the right to claim damages for loss of the property including goods and machines was available to the plaintiff on the said date – The plaintiff was required to obtain leave of the Court before filing suit for damages subsequently – The High Court has clearly erred in law in holding that the cause of action for both the suits is different.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta
Neutral Citation	2021 INSC 474
Petitioner	Abdul Khuddus
Respondent	H.m. Chandiramani (dead) Thr Lrs. & Ors.
SCR	[2021] 10 S.C.R. 643
Judgement Date	2021-09-14
Case Number	1833

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Abdul Khuddus Vs. H.m. Chandiramani (dead) Thr Lrs. & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Nandkishor Savalaram Malu (dead) Through Lrs. Vs. Hanumanmal G. Biyani (d) Thr. Lrs. & Ors.

Laxmibai (dead) Thr. Lrs. & Anr. Vs. Bhagwantbuva (dead) Thr. Lrs. & Ors.

Gantusa H. Baddi (dead) By Lrs. Vs. Meerabai G. Pai and Ors.

Edukanti Kistamma (dead) Thr. Lrs. and Ors. Vs. S. Venkatareddy (dead) Thr. Lrs. and Ors.

Davesh Nagalya (d) & Ors. Vs. Pradeep Kumar (d) Thr. Lrs. and Ors.

S.n. Kapoor (dead) By His Lrs. Vs. Basant Lal Khatri and Ors.

Jagat Pal Dhawan Vs. Kahan Singh (dead) By Lrs. and Ors.

Sankaran Pillai (dead) By Lrs. Vs. V.p. Venguduswami and Ors.

State of Haryana Vs. Harnam Singh (dead) Thr. Lrs. & Ors.

Abdul Khuddus Vs. H.m. Chandiramani (dead) Thr Lrs. & Ors.

Abdul Khuddus Vs. H.m. Chandiramani (dead) Thr Lrs. & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Nandkishor Savalaram Malu (dead) Through Lrs. Vs. Hanumanmal G. Biyani (d) Thr. Lrs. & Ors.

Laxmibai (dead) Thr. Lrs. & Anr. Vs. Bhagwantbuva (dead) Thr. Lrs. & Ors.

Gantusa H. Baddi (dead) By Lrs. Vs. Meerabai G. Pai and Ors.

Edukanti Kistamma (dead) Thr. Lrs. and Ors. Vs. S. Venkatareddy (dead) Thr. Lrs. and Ors.

Davesh Nagalya (d) & Ors. Vs. Pradeep Kumar (d) Thr. Lrs. and Ors.

S.n. Kapoor (dead) By His Lrs. Vs. Basant Lal Khatri and Ors.

Jagat Pal Dhawan Vs. Kahan Singh (dead) By Lrs. and Ors.

Sankaran Pillai (dead) By Lrs. Vs. V.p. Venguduswami and Ors.

State of Haryana Vs. Harnam Singh (dead) Thr. Lrs. & Ors.

Abdul Khuddus Vs. H.m. Chandiramani (dead) Thr Lrs. & Ors.