If the landlord says so, the tenant will have to leave! Big decision of the Supreme Court
Supreme Court: In an important decision, the Supreme Court said that the landlord has the full right to decide which property should be vacated for his needs. The tenant cannot object to this. The court made it clear that the landlord's actual need will be given priority, not the convenience of the tenant.
Supreme Court: Many people across the country earn income by renting out their properties, but sometimes the tenants refuse to vacate the premises. In this situation, a legal dispute arises. In this context, the Supreme Court has recently given an important decision, which is important for both the landlord and the tenant to know.
The Supreme Court clarified that the landlord has the full right to decide which part of the rented property should be vacated to meet his requirement. The tenant cannot refuse to vacate the premises on the ground that the landlord has other properties available which he can use.
Supreme Court's comment
According to a report by Live Law, the Supreme Court said that the law of evicting a tenant based on the genuine need of the landlord is already established. It is necessary to ensure that the desire to vacate the house is not just voluntary but the need is genuine. The court also said that the landlord understands his needs best and he has the right to decide which property he wants to vacate to meet his needs.
The tenant cannot be given any role in deciding which property the landlord should give rent-free. If the landlord has decided that he needs a particular property to meet his requirements, the tenant cannot question this decision.
Know what is the whole matter?
This case came to light when a landlord filed a petition in the Supreme Court that he wanted to install an ultrasound machine for his two unemployed sons. For this, he had to get the place vacated from the tenant. Both the lower court and the High Court had rejected the landlord's petition, after which the matter reached the Supreme Court.
A bench of Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice N. Kotishwar Singh heard this case in the Supreme Court. During the hearing, the tenant argued that the landlord also has other properties, so he can fulfill his needs by getting any other property vacated.
The Supreme Court rejected the tenant's plea
The Supreme Court rejected this argument of the tenant and said that if the landlord's need is genuine and he wants to vacate a particular property, then the tenant cannot force him to vacate any other place as per his convenience.
The court also said that if the landlord has decided to vacate a particular part of his property, he cannot be forced to evict any other tenant. In this case too, the landlord took the right decision because the place in question was located next to a medical clinic and pathological centre, which was the most suitable place to install the ultrasound machine.
This decision of the Supreme Court has made it clear that the landlord has the right to use his property according to his needs. The tenant cannot decide which property the landlord should vacate. However, the landlord's need should be genuine and it would not be legally justified to evict the tenant on the basis of mere wish. This decision is a relief for those landlords who rent out their property and face difficulties in getting it vacated when needed.
PC:Prabhat Khabar