SANDEEP V. MARNE
Sudhir Kumar Sengupta – Appellant
Versus
Kusum Pandurang Keni – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
1. This Petition is filed challenging judgment and order dated 18 June 1999 passed by the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court, by which the Appeal preferred by original Plaintiff/Respondent has been allowed setting aside the decree dated 7 June 1995 passed by the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court, by which R.A.E. & R. Suit No. 313/1024 of 1983 was dismissed. The Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court has thus, reversed the finding of the Trial Court on the issue of default in payment of rent and has decreed the Suit directing Defendant to handover possession of the suit premises to the Plaintiff-landlord.
2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that Plaintiff is the owner and landlady of the building known as ‘Dr. Keni’s House’, situated at Plot No. 176, Sion Road, Sion (West), Mumbai-400 022. The original Defendant Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sengupta was inducted as monthly tenant in respect of Flat No. 8 (suit premises) in the said building ‘Dr. Keni’s House’ at monthly rent of Rs.43.76 exclusive of permitted increases. According to Plaintiff, Defendant was irregular in payment of rent and he also not paid water pump and pump-man charges @ Rs.10
Arjun Khaimal Makhijani v. Jamnadas C. Tuliani
Manorama Masurekar v. Dhanlaxmi G. Shah and Another
Manorama S. Masurekar Vs. Dhanlaxmi G. Shah and Another
Raju Kakara Shetty Vs. Ramesh Prataprao Shirole and Another
Shah Dhansukhlal Chhaganlal Vs. DalichandVirchand Shroff (Dead) by his Legal Representatives
A tenant in default for over six months without disputing the rent is subject to eviction under Section 12(3)(a) of the Bombay Rent Act.
A tenant's failure to communicate rent deposits and respond to rent demands constitutes default, justifying eviction under the Bombay Rent Act.
Eviction under rent control law is warranted where the tenant defaults on rent for over six months, negating hardship claims absent a bona-fide requirement.
The tenant's failure to pay rent and timely file for standard rent fixation leads to eviction under the Bombay Rent Act, despite claims of payment to co-owners.
Tenant must comply with statutory deposit requirements under Section 12(3) of the Bombay Rent Act, including interest and costs, to avoid eviction.
Valid service of notice is crucial for eviction under the Bombay Rent Act, and failure to pay rent after notice justifies eviction.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory nature of the provisions of Section 12(3) of the Rent Act, requiring the tenant to deposit the whole rent and comply with the timing ....
A tenant must deposit all arrears of rent, including time-barred amounts, to claim protection from eviction under Section 15(3) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act.
A valid demand notice under Section 15(2) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act is essential before eviction on grounds of rent default; failure to comply renders the suit non-maintainable.
A valid demand notice under Section 15(2) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act must specify the amount due and be addressed to the tenant; failure to do so invalidates eviction proceedings.
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.