TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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>Auction Purchaser Can Evict Tenant Without Sale Certificate; Ordinary Law Applies, Not Delhi Rent Control Act.</h1> <h3>Roshan Lal Goswami Versus Gobind Raj and Ors.</h3> Roshan Lal Goswami Versus Gobind Raj and Ors. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Whether an auction purchaser of evacuee property, who has not yet obtained a sale certificate but to whom the occupier has attorned, can maintain a suit for ejectment under the ordinary law.2. Applicability of the Delhi Rent Control Act to premises provisionally possessed by auction purchasers but still owned by the Government.3. The legal implications of attornment and the rights of provisional possessors.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Auction Purchaser's Right to Maintain Suit for EjectmentThe core issue is whether an auction purchaser who has not yet obtained a sale certificate but to whom the occupier has attorned can maintain a suit for ejectment under the ordinary law. The court held that:- Possessory Rights: An auction purchaser, even without proprietary rights, has possessory rights. This means they can transfer possession to another by lease, creating a landlord-tenant relationship.- Estoppel Principle: A tenant is estopped from denying the landlord's title unless they first surrender possession. The tenant cannot escape payment of rent by questioning the landlord's title.- Attornment: The tenant's attornment to the auction purchaser creates a landlord-tenant relationship, allowing the auction purchaser to maintain a suit for ejectment despite not having a complete ownership title.Issue 2: Applicability of the Delhi Rent Control ActThe court examined whether the Delhi Rent Control Act applies to premises provisionally possessed by auction purchasers but still owned by the Government:- Section 3 of the Delhi Rent Control Act: This section excludes the applicability of the Act to premises belonging to the Government. Since the ownership still vests in the Government and not in the auction purchaser, the provisions of the Act do not apply.- Ordinary Law: In the absence of the Rent Control Act's applicability, the ordinary law, as embodied in the Transfer of Property Act, governs the landlord-tenant relationship.Issue 3: Legal Implications of Attornment and Rights of Provisional PossessorsThe court discussed the implications of attornment and the rights of provisional possessors:- Attornment: It signifies an agreement by the tenant to recognize the auction purchaser as the new landlord, thereby creating a landlord-tenant relationship. This relationship endures during the currency of the tenancy, and the tenant is estopped from denying the landlord's title.- Provisional Possession: Even though the auction purchaser does not have complete ownership, they have possessory rights, which include the right to lease the property and collect rent. This right is protected by law and allows the auction purchaser to maintain a suit for ejectment.Conclusion:The court concluded that an auction purchaser of evacuee property, who has not yet obtained a sale certificate but to whom the occupier has attorned, can maintain a suit for ejectment under the ordinary law. The Delhi Rent Control Act does not apply to premises still owned by the Government, and the ordinary law governs the landlord-tenant relationship. The attornment by the tenant creates a landlord-tenant relationship, allowing the auction purchaser to exercise rights against the tenant, including eviction for breach of tenancy obligations.
TaxTMI 