Supreme Court of India Judgements

46940 Judgements hosted as on 30/11/2025 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Rent

Rent

Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 (Act, 1965) — Sections 12 and 18 — Eviction for non-payment of rent — Procedure under Section 12 in Appeal against Section 12(3) eviction order — Whether the entire summary procedure under Section 12 must be repeated before the Rent Control Appellate Authority when challenging an eviction order passed under Section 12(3) — Held: A fresh application under Section 12(1) of the Act is not mandatory when challenging an eviction order under Section 12(3) before the Appellate Authority — Rent Control Appellate Authority is not the Court of first instance and only tests the exercise of jurisdiction and power by the Rent Control Court; it is not required to re-determine the issue of default or outstanding amount of rent — Insisting on repeating the entire Section 12 procedure would be superfluous, unnecessary, contrary to the statute’s spirit, and lead to an absurd/unjust result, akin to turning the summary procedure on its head.

Nov 23, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1340 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH P.U. SIDHIQUE AND OTHERS Vs. ZAKARIYA ( Before : Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan, JJ. ) Civil Appeal Nos.13901-13902 of 2025 (Arising…

Rent

“Court-Approved Agreement Reached in Eviction Case Involving Religious Endowment Property” Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 – Section 78 – Order of Ejectment – The tenants were declared as encroachers under the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, and the High Court ordered them to vacate the premises – The tenants challenged the order in the before this Court – Amicable Resolution

Mar 8, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH K. BALASUBRAMANI ETC. — Appellant Vs. THE TAMIL NADU GOVERNMENT REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT AND OTHERS ETC. — Respondent (…

Rent

Delhi Rent Control Act, 1995 – Ejectment – Landlords and the tenant of a bungalow in Delhi – Dispute is about the ejectment of the tenant from the demised premises – The High Court of Delhi remanded the matter to the Rent Controller for adjudication under the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1995 – The tenant is occupying the demised premises at a monthly rental of Rs.3,328/- since 1972 – Settlement Terms

Mar 8, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SWAMI GOVERDHAN RANGACHARIJI AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. M/S. A.J. PRINTERS — Respondent ( Before : J.K. Maheshwari and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Petition…

Rent

Maharashtra Rent Control Act 1999 – Section 16(1)(i) – When landlord may recover possession – The Bombay High Court, in a judgment dated 4th August 2015, set aside the eviction decrees passed against the tenants in two separate suits filed by the landlords – this Court set aside the eviction decrees and remanded the cases back to the trial court for fresh consideration

Feb 4, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BAITULLA ISMAIL SHAIKH AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. KHATIJA ISMAIL PANHALKAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose and Bela M. Trivedi,…

Rent Transfer Of Property Act

Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – Section 106 – Declaration of title – Permanent injunction – Quit notice – Validity of – Tamil Nadu City Tenants Protection Act, 1921 – After purchase of second schedule property from original owner, defendant rightly issued quit notice under Section 106 of Act 1882 to plaintiff

Nov 12, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MOHIDEEN ABDUL KHADAR (DEAD)THROUGH LRS. — Appellant Vs. RAHMATH BEEVI (D) THR. HER LRS. AND OTHER — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose and…

Limitation Rent

Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 – Sections 7(1) and 7(2) – Non-payment of arrears of rent – Extension of time – While the Limitation Act may be generally applicable to the proceedings under the Tenancy Act, the restricted proviso under Section 7 of the said Act, providing a time period beyond which no extension can be granted, has to be applicable.

Oct 22, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEBASISH PAUL AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. AMAL BORAL — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Rent

Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 itself has been abrogated in the year 2001, with a new statute coming into force, i.e. The Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001, which does not create any similar bar – Decree of eviction favour of the appellant-landlord – Appeal allowed.

Jul 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAVI KHANDELWAL — Appellant Vs. M/S. TALUKA STORES — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…

Rent

Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 – Sections 14(1)(e) and 25-B(8) – Eviction on the ground of bona fide requirement – appellant-landlord is said to have acquired title to the property in question on being transferred by her brother-in-law; and has sought eviction of the respective tenants from suit premises on the ground that the premises were required bona fide by her for use and occupation of herself and the other members of her joint family – Order passed by the Rent Controller restored.

Apr 30, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KUSUM LATA SHARMA — Appellant Vs. ARVIND SINGH — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and Sanjay Kumar, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.3111 of…

You missed

Constitution Environment

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 21 — Right to Life and Healthy Environment — Environmental Degradation: Pollution of Jojari, Bandi, and Luni Rivers in Rajasthan due to untreated industrial effluents and municipal sewage threatens the lives of 2 million people and the ecosystem — This constitutes a gross dereliction of constitutional duty and a direct constitutional injury — The right to a healthy environment, including pollution-free water and air, is an indispensable facet of the right to life under Article 21, reinforced by Articles 48A and 51A(g) — Judicial intervention is warranted when environmental degradation strikes at the foundation of these guarantees. (Paras 3, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 28)

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw
Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(6), Section 11(12)(a), Section 2(1)(f), Section 2(2) — Applicability of Part I, including Section 11, to International Commercial Arbitration (ICA) — Dispute arising from a Buyer and Seller Agreement (BSA) where Respondent No. 1 is foreign company (incorporated in Benin) — BSA stipulates arbitration “will take place in Benin” and is governed by laws of Benin — Held: Dispute is an ICA under Section 2(1)(f) — Under Section 2(2), Part I of the Act applies only where the place of arbitration is in India — Designation of Benin as the place of arbitration, coupled with choice of Benin law as governing/curial law, unequivocally establishes Benin as the juridical seat — Indian Courts lack jurisdiction under Section 11 to appoint an arbitrator for a foreign-seated arbitration — Petition seeking appointment of an arbitrator in India is fundamentally misconceived and legally untenable. (Paras 2, 23, 24, 25, 26, 30)

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw
Tenders

Government Contracts and Tenders — Letter of Intent (LoI) — Legal Nature — An LoI is ordinarily a precursor to a contract, indicating intent to enter into a future agreement, but does not itself create a concluded contract or vested, enforceable rights unless the necessary preconditions are satisfied — A bidder’s commercial expectation that a contract will follow an LoI is not a juridical entitlement — If the LoI explicitly stipulates conditions precedent (like compatibility testing, live demonstration, and cost disclosure) before execution of an agreement/final award letter, the LoI remains provisional and conditional until such prerequisites are met. (Paras 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw
I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Section 7 — Application by Financial Creditor — Rejection for technical defects — Affidavit Verification — Whether an application under Section 7 of the IBC, verified later than the date of the supporting affidavit, is liable to be rejected at the threshold — Mere filing of a ‘defective’ affidavit (e.g., dated before application verification) does not render the Section 7 application non est and liable to be rejected; such a defect is curable and not fundamental. (Paras 1, 17)

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw