In Brief
This case concerns whether a compromise decree for eviction between a landlord and tenant is valid without statutory grounds being established, and whether a delay in appealing such a decree should be condoned when coercion is alleged. The appellants (pharmacy tenants) claimed they were forced under police pressure to agree to vacate a property. The Supreme Court held that under rent control legislation, no eviction can be ordered without statutory grounds being made out, even with a compromise. Where reasonable doubt exists that police coercion vitiated the compromise, this weighs in favour of the pressured party. The Court allowed the appeal, restored the appellate court's order condoning the 604-day delay, and directed the case proceed on merits.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.