Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Eviction of Subtenant Amidst Legal Contentions

Court affirms eviction due to subletting without landlord's consent; revisional jurisdiction limitations highlighted.

In a significant judgment, the Himachal Pradesh High Court, presided over by Justice Satyen Vaidya, dismissed a revision petition filed by subtenant Ashok Kumar challenging an eviction order. The case, Ashok Kumar v. Dulari Kapil, revolved around the subletting of a commercial premises in Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh, without the landlord's consent, a violation under the Himachal Urban Rent Control Act, 1987.

The landlord, Dulari Kapil, had initially filed an eviction petition against the tenant and subtenant on grounds of unauthorized subletting and personal bona fide requirement. However, the eviction was pursued solely on the subletting issue after the personal requirement ground was rejected. Both the Rent Controller and the Appellate Authority affirmed the eviction order based on the subletting charge.

The petitioner, Ashok Kumar, argued his occupancy was legitimate as he was a tenant under the previous owner, Dev Raj. However, the court found no substantial evidence supporting his claim as a tenant with rights distinct from the tenant who had sublet the premises.

Justice Vaidya, while dismissing the revision petition, emphasized the limitations of revisional jurisdiction, stating it cannot reappraise evidence or alter factual findings unless there is clear perversity or illegality. The court also rejected the landlord's objection against the maintainability of the revision petition by the subtenant, referencing the Supreme Court's ruling in Karam Singh Sobti v. Pratap Chand, which upheld a subtenant's right to appeal if considered an aggrieved party.

The judgment highlights the nuanced application of subletting laws and the scope of revisional jurisdiction, reinforcing that such jurisdiction is not akin to appellate powers and is intended for correcting errors of law rather than reevaluating factual evidence.

Bottom Line:

Sub-tenant impleaded as a party in an eviction petition can challenge the eviction order in revision if deemed an aggrieved party. Revisional jurisdiction does not permit reappraisal of evidence or substituting findings of fact unless there is perversity or illegality.

Statutory provision(s): Himachal Urban Rent Control Act, 1987, Sections 14(ii), 24(5).

Ashok Kumar v. Dulari Kapil, (Himachal Pradesh) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2780214