TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court clarifies tenant rights under Rent Act, dismisses application under amended provision.</h1> The Supreme Court held that the amended Section 3(c) of the Rent Act applied to a pending standard rent application filed by the tenant, resulting in the ... - Issues:1. Applicability of amended Section 3(c) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 to a standard rent application pending before the Court on 1.12.1988.Analysis:Issue 1: Applicability of amended Section 3(c) to pending standard rent applicationThe case involved a dispute where the appellant-tenant filed a standard rent application on 11.4.1978, seeking fixation of standard rent at Rs. 1,350 per month for a shop leased at Rs. 5,000 per month. The respondent moved an application under Section 151, CPC before the Rent Controller on 27.5.2000, seeking dismissal of the standard rent application based on the amended Section 3(c) of the Rent Act. The Rent Controller allowed the landlord's application, leading to subsequent appeals. The appellant contended that the amendment did not intend to affect rights vested at the time of filing the standard rent application. However, the Court held that the right to pay standard rent was not an accrued right but a right to take advantage of an enactment, and the amendment rationalized the Rent Act to balance the interests of landlords and tenants. The Court emphasized that the rights of a statutory tenant under the Rent Act were protective, not vested, and the amendment aimed to withdraw protection from wealthier tenants. Consequently, the Court dismissed the civil appeal, upholding the dismissal of the standard rent application due to the amended Section 3(c.Conclusion:The Supreme Court ruled that the amended Section 3(c) of the Rent Act was applicable to the pending standard rent application filed by the tenant, leading to the dismissal of the application. The Court clarified the distinction between accrued and mere rights, emphasizing that the amendment aimed to rationalize the Rent Act and strike a balance between landlords and tenants' interests. The judgment highlighted that the rights of a statutory tenant were protective, not vested, and the amendment intended to withdraw protection from wealthier tenants. Thus, the civil appeal was dismissed, affirming the dismissal of the standard rent application based on the amended provision.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
