In Brief
A landlord sought eviction of his tenant, claiming the tenant had sublet a kirana shop to his son-in-law contrary to the Delhi Rent Control Act. The tenant claimed they had entered into a genuine partnership. The Rent Controller and Appellate Authority found the partnership genuine. The High Court agreed, relying partly on a principle that close relatives occupying premises do not constitute subletting. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that even where ostensibly a partnership, allowing another person to occupy and conduct business exclusively without written landlord consent amounts to subletting under Section 14(4) of the Act. The Court emphasized that substance prevails over form, and family relationships do not override statutory protections. The tenant was ordered evicted with time to vacate until October 2017.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.