Eviction decree against one joint tenant binds all heirs, rejects execution objections: Raj HC

Jaipur: The Rajasthan High Court has held that upon the death of an original tenant, the tenancy rights devolve upon the legal heirs as joint tenants and not as separate co-tenants, and that an eviction decree passed against one joint tenant is executable and binding upon all persons claiming under the tenancy. The Court held that such joint tenancy is single and indivisible in nature and does not create independent tenancy rights in each heir.

Justice Bipin Gupta recorded that the distinction between co-tenancy and joint tenancy is well settled in law and that in cases of joint tenancy, service of notice upon or institution of eviction proceedings against one joint tenant is sufficient. The Court held that non-impleadment of all heirs of a deceased tenant does not render an eviction decree inexecutable where the decree has been passed against successors who were in possession of the premises.

These observations were made while dismissing a writ petition filed by Smt. Chaya Sethi and her children, challenging the orders dated December 2, 2019 passed by the Rent Tribunal, Jaipur, and February 24, 2020 passed by the Appellate Rent Tribunal, Jaipur, whereby objections raised by the petitioners to the execution of an eviction decree were rejected.

The case arose out of a tenancy created in the year 1949 by Late Shri Balkishan in favour of Late Shri Jamnalal and Late Shri Banshidhar. After the death of the original tenants, their family members continued to occupy the premises. Respondent landlords instituted eviction proceedings under Section 9 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 on the grounds of substantial damage, sub-letting and denial of title. The eviction petition was allowed on January 16, 2016, and the decree attained finality.

During execution of the eviction decree, the petitioners filed objections under Section 47 read with Order XXI Rules 97, 101 and 104 CPC, contending that they were successors of Late Shri Vimal Kumar Sethi, who was not impleaded in the eviction proceedings, and therefore the decree could not be executed against them. The objections were rejected by the Rent Tribunal, and the appellate tribunal affirmed the said order.

Before the High Court, the petitioners contended that by virtue of Section 2(i) of the Act of 2001, they were co-tenants and that without impleading all co-tenants, the eviction decree was inexecutable. Reliance was placed on the decision in Kedar Lal & Ors. vs LRs of Ram Dyal. The respondents opposed the petition, contending that the heirs succeeded as joint tenants and that eviction against one joint tenant binds all.

The High Court examined the definition of “tenant” under Section 2(i) of the Act of 2001 and contrasted it with the definition under the repealed Act of 1950. The Court noted that the legislature had consciously omitted the word “heir” from the definition under the Act of 2001, indicating that tenancy rights do not vest independently in every heir. The Court relied upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in H.C. Pandey vs G.C. Paul, Kanji Manji vs Trustees of the Port of Bombay and Suresh Kumar Kohli vs Rakesh Jain to reiterate that heirs succeed as joint tenants and that eviction proceedings against one joint tenant are sufficient.

The Court further held that the plea of an alleged oral sale of the property was untenable in law and amounted to a collateral attack on a decree which had already attained finality. It was recorded that no perversity or jurisdictional error was shown in the concurrent findings of the courts below.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the eviction decree was legally executable against the petitioners and that the orders passed by the Rent Tribunal and the Appellate Rent Tribunal warranted no interference.

Case Title
Smt. Chaya Sethi & Ors. vs Jitendra Bohra & Ors.

Case Number
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5320/2020

Court
High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench

Bench
Justice Bipin Gupta

Date of Judgment
February 7, 2026

Advocates
For the petitioners: Mr. Ashok Mishra
For the respondents: Mr. Amol Vyas, Mr. Pulkit Arora, Mr. Deven Pareek