Vithal N. Shetti – Appellant
Versus
Prakash N. Rudrakar – Respondent
ORDER
This is tenant s appeal by special leave. Though the appeals are three in number, the subject matter is one common judgment and therefore, the three are being treated as one appeal. The suit premises are situated in the city of Pune and governed by the provisions of The Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter "the Act" for short). The suit premises are admittedly owned by respondent No. 1 and are held in tenancy by the appellant. Proceedings for eviction of the appellants were initiated on very many grounds. At this stage, we are concerned only with the ground of eviction available under Clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the Act, which provides that a landlord shall be entitled to recover possession of any premises if the Court is satisfied that the tenant has, without the landlord s consent given in writing, erected on the premises any permanent structure.
2. Incidentally, it may be stated that the suit premises where initially owned by one Dattaraya Chiplunkar, who died in the year 1974 and his widow, having succeeded to the rights in the property, transferred the same to the respondent No. 1 in the year 1978. The appellant cam
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.