Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
N. J. JAMADAR
Rajendra Gangadhar Patil – Appellant
Versus
Bhanuprakash Bherumal Khandelwal (since deceased) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual context of the eviction case. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. defendant’s resistance and claims regarding eviction. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. observations on trial court's findings. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. criteria for determining permanent structures. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 5. evaluation of evidence and findings regarding wc permanence. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 6. final order reversing the appellate decision. (Para 38 , 39) |
JUDGMENT :
N. J. JAMADAR, J.
1. This revision application is directed against a judgment and decree dated 26th March, 2021 passed by the Appellate Bench of the Court of Small Causes in Appeal No.60 of 2011, whereby the Appellate Bench was persuaded to allow the appeal preferred by the deceased respondent Nos.1 and 2 (the landlords) against the judgment and decree in RAE&R Suit No.230/393 of 2000 dismissing the suit, and instead decree the said suit for eviction of the applicant on the ground of carrying out additions and alterations of permanent nature without the consent of the landlords.
2. The background facts necessary for determination of the revision application
Eviction under Rent Act requires definitive evidence of permanent structures, including their nature and impact, which was insufficiently established in this case.
Permanent alterations made by a tenant without landlord consent constitute grounds for eviction under Section 13(1)(b) of the Bombay Rent Act.
Unauthorized alterations became permanent constructions without landlord consent, justifying eviction under Section 13(1)(b) of the Bombay Rent Act.
A landlord cannot seek eviction on arrears of rent if the statutory notice has not followed the deadline provision while unauthorized constructions can justify eviction if they are proven to cause de....
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.
The judgment establishes that the erection of permanent structures by a tenant without the landlord's consent, in violation of Section 16(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, can lead to ....
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....
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 the interpretation of the definition of 'building' under the UP Urban Buildings Act and the jurisdictional aspects of suits before the Small Causes....
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
