Back
MANISH PITALE
Hermando De Souza (deceased) By Lrs. – Appellant
Versus
Agostinho Juas Tadeu De Menezes – Respondent
ORDER
1. The original tenant is before this Court challenging concurrent orders passed by the Rent Controller and the District Court, whereby eviction of the tenant is directed on the ground specified in Section 22(2)(c) of the Goa Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act.
2. The case of the respondents was that the petitioner/tenant had constructed a toilet (WC) in the veranda of the First floor of the premises let out by the respondents and that the tenant had further changed the internal plastering and flooring of the shop on the ground floor and that tiles were put in the open veranda, without the consent of the respondents. It was claimed that the filthy water from the WC accumulated and spread on the walls and windows of the building, giving a foul smell, thereby causing nuisance to the other occupants of the building and people in the neighbourhood.
3. According to the respondents, by indulging in such an act, the petitioner/tenant had invited order of eviction under Section 22(2)(c) of the aforesaid Act.
4. The aforesaid claims of the respondents were disputed by the petitioner. In fact, the petitioner denied that the respondents were his landlords and further pleaded
Material impairment of value or utility of premises justifies eviction under Section 22(2)(c) of the Act.
Material alterations affecting rented property must permanently diminish value from the landlord's perspective to qualify for eviction under relevant law.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that parties should be held to their commitments made before the Rent Controller and the court, and that pleadings before the Rent Controller shoul....
Revisional jurisdiction permits interference with perverse appellate findings ignoring tenant's admissions of unauthorized substantial alterations, spouse's suitable residence acquisition, and subjec....
Alterations made without permission by a tenant constitute grounds for eviction under sections 13(1)(a) and 13(1)(b) of the Bombay Rent Act, invalidating contrary findings of the appellate court.
Important Point : The court upheld the eviction decree based on unlawful subletting and unauthorized structural alterations, interpreting lease provisions to restrict successive subletting without la....
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
