In Brief
Surinder (landlord) sought eviction of Nand Lal and others as tenants, arguing their shops had become unsafe and dilapidated under the Haryana Urban Rent Control Act, 1973. The Rent Controller, Appellate Authority, and High Court all found the premises fit for habitation based on expert evidence and dismissed the eviction petitions. Surinder appealed to the Supreme Court, contending the courts ignored his expert's detailed structural report and that the later collapse of a roof structure in 2012 proved deterioration. The Supreme Court upheld the dismissal, holding that the trial court's factual findings based on competing expert evidence were plausible and not perverse, and the High Court correctly exercised restraint in revision. However, new events may form grounds for a fresh petition."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.