ALI AHMED vs MAQSOOD ALI — 2/2026

Case under Suit for Declaration Section 96. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 28th April 2026.

RCA DJ - REG CIVIL APPEAL FOR DJ ADJ

CNR: DLNE010034592025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

17-11-2025

Filing Number

1754/2025

Filing Date

18-11-2025

Registration No

2/2026

Registration Date

19-11-2025

Court

District and Sessions Judge, North-East, KKD

Judge

429-District Judge

Decision Date

28th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Acts & Sections

Suit For Declaration Section 96

Petitioner(s)

ALI AHMED

Adv. jagdish pershad

Respondent(s)

MAQSOOD ALI

Hearing History

Judge: 429-District Judge

28-04-2026

Disposed

25-04-2026

Order

24-04-2026

Order

13-04-2026

Order

01-04-2026

Order

Final Orders / Judgements

28-04-2026
COPY OF ORDER
28-04-2026
COPY OF JUDGMENT

Case Summary: Ali Ahmed v. Maqsood Ali (RCA DJ 2/26) District Judge Aashish Gupta upheld the trial court's possession decree in favor of landlord Ali Ahmed against tenant Maqsood Ali over the second floor of a Delhi property. The court found that Maqsood admitted entering as a tenant and thus remained a tenant despite claiming he paid ₹7.65 lac for eventual ownership—applying the principle "once a tenant, always a tenant." Since the disputed floor was constructed after September 2021, it fell outside the Delhi Rent Control Act's 10-year protection period, allowing eviction without rent control restrictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

21-11-2025
COPY OF ORDER
16-12-2025
COPY OF ORDER
12-01-2026
COPY OF ORDER
14-03-2026
COPY OF ORDER
01-04-2026
COPY OF ORDER
13-04-2026
COPY OF ORDER
25-04-2026
COPY OF ORDER
casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Ali Ahmed v. Maqsood Ali (RCA DJ 2/26) District Judge Aashish Gupta upheld the trial court's possession decree in favor of landlord Ali Ahmed against tenant Maqsood Ali over the second floor of a Delhi property. The court found that Maqsood admitted entering as a tenant and thus remained a tenant despite claiming he paid ₹7.65 lac for eventual ownership—applying the principle "once a tenant, always a tenant." Since the disputed floor was constructed after September 2021, it fell outside the Delhi Rent Control Act's 10-year protection period, allowing eviction without rent control restrictions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Sessions Judge, North-East, KKD All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case