In Brief
These consolidated appeals challenge the correctness of Satyawati Sharma (2008 5 SCC 287), which struck down the discriminatory portion of Section 14(1)(e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, thereby extending landlords' right to seek eviction on bona fide need to both residential and non-residential premises. Appellants—non-residential tenants—argued that Satyawati Sharma is per incuriam and should be referred to a larger Bench. The Court held that Satyawati Sharma is not per incuriam because: (1) the Constitution Bench in Gian Devi Anand had suggested removal of such discrimination; (2) Gauri Shanker, dealing with heritability, is distinguishable; (3) Section 25B (procedure) does not affect substantive constitutionality; and (4) the doctrine of temporal reasonableness justified the Court's finding that the 50-year-old discrimination had become arbitrary. The Court rejected the referral prayer and remitted the appeals for hearing on merits.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.