'Respect For Higher Courts' Orders A Basic Principle' : Supreme Court Rebukes Rent Authority For Revisiting Eviction Order Affirmed By SC

The Supreme Court has censured a Rent Control Authority in Uttar Pradesh for disregarding its order affirming the tenant's eviction by reopening the matter on the tenant's application, despite the proceedings having already attained finality. A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N. Kotiswar Singh was dealing with a case where, despite the tenant's eviction attaining finality, having remained undisturbed up to the Supreme Court, the Rent Control Authority entertained the tenant's application seeking recall of the eviction order on the ground of disputing the landlord's ownership of the premises. The Respondent-landlord challenged the Rent Control Authority's decision to restore the proceedings before the Allahabad High Court, which ruled in favour of the landlord and set aside the Rent Control Authority's decision to restore the proceedings. Aggrieved by the High Court's decision, the tenant appealed to the Supreme Court. Refusing to interfere with the High Court's finding, the judgment authored by Justice Karol found the Rent Control Authority guilty of judicial indiscipline for proceeding to recall the matter, despite it having attained finality before the Supreme Court. The Court held that the Rent Control Authority's decision to recall the proceedings was without jurisdiction and violated the principle of judicial comity. “Respect for the authority of orders passed post adjudication by a judicial activity, be it this Court or the High Court is a basic principle of judicial comity, more so, upon attaining finality. The principle of nullity of jurisdiction is also common knowledge and well established.”, the court observed. “It was however ordered that the vacant and peaceful possession of the premises in question be handed over to the landlord. This became a binding and operative direction. When this is the direction occupying the field, we are at a loss to conceive of a situation where an action of the Rent Authority can, in effect, render the finding confirmed on appeal to the High Court as also this Court, a nullity by compromising the basis therefor.”, the court held. As the erring judicial officer who acted as a Rent Control Authority had tendered an unconditional apology, the Court accepted the same. It held “these proceedings in no way shall impact the career progression of the concerned judicial officer.” Accordingly, the appeal was disposed of. Cause Title: RAJESH GOYAL VERSUS M/S LAXMI CONSTRUCTIONS & ORS.Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 297Click here to download judgmentAppearances: For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Kaushik Choudhury, AOR For Respondent(s) :Mr. Rohit Amit Sthalekar, AOR Mr. Shashank Singh, Adv. Mr. Ali Rahim, Adv. Mr. Mohsin Rahim, Adv. Mr. Arvind Sangwan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shaurya Sahay, Adv. Mr. Deepak Swami, Adv. Mr. Utkarsh Singh, Adv. Mr. Manish Sharma, Adv. Mr. Sahil Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Saurabh Sharma, AOR Mrs. Sonali Sharma, Adv. Ms. Palak Mathur, Adv. Mr. Aman Jaiswal, Adv.

'Respect For Higher Courts' Orders A Basic Principle' : Supreme Court Rebukes Rent Authority For Revisiting Eviction Order Affirmed By SC

Yash Mittal

Tags