Back
PANKAJ MITHAL, S. V. N. BHATTI
Annaya Kocha Shetty (Dead) Through Lrs – Appellant
Versus
Laxmibai Narayan Satose Since Deceased Through Lrs – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(S.V.N. BHATTI, J.)
1. The Civil Appeal arises from the Order dated 16.07.2018 in Civil Revision Application No. 247 of 2016 in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (“Impugned Order”), confirming the Judgment dated 17.08.2015 in appeal No. 547 of 2004 of the appellate bench. The Judgment dated 17.08.2015 reversed the judgment and decree dated 20/22.03.2004 in R.A.D. Suit No. 1860 of 1997 before the Small Causes Court at Mumbai. The LRs of the plaintiff are appellant nos. 1.1 to 1.4 in the Civil Appeal.
2. The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration that the plaintiff is the deemed tenant/protected licensee of the first defendant in terms of section 15A of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, as enforced from 01.02.1973 (“Bombay Rent Act”), for shop nos. 5 and 6, Shri Samarthashraya Vishranti Graha, Nanabhai Court, Dr. Babasahib Ambdedkar Marg, Hindmata Junction, Dadar, Bombay-400014 (for short, ‘the Plaint Schedule’). The plaintiff also prayed for a restraint order against the defendants from interfering with or dispossessing the plaintiff from the Plaint Schedule. The suit was filed against Laxmibai Narayan Satose/defendant no.1, and M.S. Nan
(1) Interpretation of contract - Construction of a deed is a matter of law - However, when there is ambiguity in deed, determining its meaning is a mixed question of fact and law.(2) Oral evidence - ....
A licensee in occupation on 1st February 1973 is deemed a tenant under Section 15A of the Bombay Rent Act if the license was subsisting; extraneous evidence is admissible to ascertain the true nature....
(1) Contractual interpretation depends on intentions expressed by parties and dredging out true meaning is an ‘iterative process’ for Courts.(2) Once parties have accepted recitals and contract, resp....
The substance of the agreement, the intention of the parties, and the nature of the rights granted are crucial in determining whether an agreement creates a lease or a license.
The intention of the parties, as expressed in contractual language, determines the distinction between a landlord-tenant relationship and that of a licensor-licensee.
The Defendant was not a protected licensee under the Bombay Rent Act, and the Civil Court had jurisdiction to adjudicate the recovery of business and machinery, necessitating remand for subsequent ev....
The determination of the relationship as licensee or tenant hinges on the parties' intention as reflected in the agreement, not merely on exclusive possession.
The distinction between lease and license must adhere to explicit terms of agreements, with possession alone insufficient to confer tenancy rights.
To claim protection under the Bombay Rent Act, a defendant must prove a subsisting license agreement before the cut-off date of 01/02/1973; mere occupation does not confer tenancy rights.
Occupants must establish lawful subsisting license agreements as of February 1, 1973, to benefit from tenant protections under the Bombay Rent Act; mere possession or oral agreements are insufficient....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
