Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: 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.
Analysis: The transfer of ownership in auctioned evacuee property was held to depend on the issue of the sale certificate and payment of the balance consideration, so the statutory protection under Section 29 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 did not arise at the stage of mere provisional possession. Even so, possession itself was treated as sufficient to sustain a landlord-tenant relationship, because attornment by the occupier created mutual rights and obligations and the tenant was estopped from disputing the landlord's title under the settled rule embodied in Section 116 of the Indian Evidence Act. The exclusion of premises belonging to the Government from the rent-control regime was read literally, and the Court declined to add an exception for auction-purchasers at the intermediate stage, treating the gap as a casus omissus that could not be cured by construction.
Conclusion: Yes. An auction-purchaser who has provisional possession and to whom the occupier has attorned can maintain a suit for ejectment under the ordinary law, even though the sale certificate has not yet been issued.