The power of judgment on admission
favour of the landlord, relied on the averments made by the tenant, in its written statement held that the facts pointed to the existence of a landlord-tenant relationship.
In passing the above judgment, the Hon’ble Court relied on its own judgment of year 1976, in the matter of Sri Ram Pasricha versus Jagannath, wherein the Hon’ble Court relied on a related proposition of law, namely ‘estoppel’ (barred). In the said case the Hon’ble Court held that in a suit for eviction by a landlord, the tenant is stopped from questioning the title of the previous landlord because of Section 116 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, where, the tenant was in possession of land as a tenant of a subsequent landlord.
Section 116 of the Evidence Act, postulates the principle, that no tenant during the pendency of the tenancy can be permitted to deny that the landlord had title, at the beginning of the tenancy. I must caution the reader that this is a complicated principle of law and needs to be explained in greater detail through a complete article on Section 116 of the Evidence Act.