Babarjit Singh Hari Singh VS Divakar Vishwanath Surve

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

SANDEEP V. MARNE
Babarjit Singh Hari Singh – Appellant
Versus
Divakar Vishwanath Surve – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicants :Mr. S.M. Gorwadkar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vaibhav Mehta and Mr. Nilesh Pandey i/b Vaibhav Mehta & Associates.
For the Respondents:Mr. Atul Damle, Senior Advocate with Mr. Suresh Sabrad, Mr. Amey Sawant, Ms. Neha Zanje, G. Saldanha, Mr. Pratik Sabrad and Ms. Payal Vardhan.

Table of Content
1. details of tenancy and existing lawsuits (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. arguments presented concerning tenant status and family ties (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
3. court's analysis of evidence regarding tenancy and subletting (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 24 , 29 , 30 , 31)
4. past litigations establish conflicting claims. (Para 16)
5. subletting invalidates tenancy if not occupied by tenant. (Para 28)
6. conclusion regarding the validity of claims and judgment rationale (Para 38 , 39 , 40)
7. final judgment and order details (Para 41 , 42)

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep V. Marne, J.

A. THE CHALLENGE

1. Applicants have filed Civil Revision Application challenging the judgment and order dated 1 November 2023 passed by the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court allowing Appeal No. 100 of 2017 filed by Plaintiffs-landlords and setting aside the judgment and decree dated 9 October 2015 passed by the Small Causes Court by which R.A.E. Suit No.1303/1949 of 2009 was dismissed. The Appellate Bench has decreed the suit directing that tenancy of the Applicants/Defendants over the suit premises is terminated on the ground of subletting under Section 16 (1)(e) of the Maharashtra Ren