Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a civil appeal concerning the eviction of tenants from premises in Lucknow. The appellants, Sanjay Kumar Vaish and others, challenged an order from the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad which had ruled in favor of the tenants, Rajendra Kumar Agarwal and others, on the grounds of improper service of notice. The Supreme Court reviewed the High Court's decision and found that the learned Single Judge had erred in concluding that the notice was not properly served. Testimony from the postman indicated that the notice was indeed tendered to the tenants, who refused to accept it, which the court deemed as proper service. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order. The respondents requested additional time to vacate the premises, citing a lack of accommodation in Lucknow and their long-standing business operations. The court granted them four weeks to file an undertaking and directed that they must vacate the premises by December 31, 2010, upon payment of all arrears of rent. Failure to comply would allow the appellants to execute the eviction decree immediately. The appeal was thus disposed of with these directions.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Service of Notice - Proper Service - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The court found that the notice was deemed to be properly served as the postman testified that it was tendered to the tenants who refused it. The High Court's order was set aside due to this error in finding regarding service of notice. Held that refusal constitutes proper service (Paras Not mentioned).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the notice was properly served on the tenants.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order and directed the respondents to vacate the premises by December 31, 2010, upon payment of all arrears of rent.
Law Points
- Proper service of notice
- Deemed service
- Tenant eviction
- Writ jurisdiction
