IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
N.J.Jamadar
Venkatesh Krishna Bhandarkar – Appellant
Versus
Henry D’Souza – Respondent
JUDGMENT:
N. J. JAMADAR, J.
1. This Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assails the legality, propriety and correctness of a Judgment and Decree dated 27th November 1998 passed by the Appellate Bench of the Court of Small Causes in Appeal No. 44 of 1993, whereby the Appeal preferred by the deceased Plaintiff (predecessor-in-title of Respondent Nos. 1a to 1d), came to be partly allowed by setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court in RAD Suit No. 3041 of 1977, and thereby declaring that the deceased Respondent-Plaintiff acquired the status of a deemed tenant under Section 15A of the BOMBAY RENTS, HOTEL AND LODGING HOUSE RATES CONTROL ACT , 1947 (“the Bombay Rent Act, 1947”), and the judgment and order dated 29th April 1999 in Review Petition - Interim Notice No. 5675 of 1998, whereby the said Interim Notice also came to be dismissed.
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the background facts leading to this Petition can be stated as under:
2.1 For the sake of convenience and clarity the parties are hereinafter referred to in the capacity in which they were arrayed before the Trial Court in RAD Suit No. 3041 of 1977.
2.2 The Defendant - predecessor-in-
D. H. Maniar and Ors Vs Waman Laxman Kudav
M/s A.V.R. and Co and Ors Vs Fair Housing Society Ltd & Ors
Smt. Gangabai w/o Rambilas Gilda vs. Smt. Chhabubai w/o Pukharajji Gandhi
V. Anantha Raju & Anr Vs T.M. Narasimhan & Ors
Delta International Ltd Vs Shyam Sundar Ganeriwalla And Anr
Chogalal Santokhji Raval Vs Sjamkarprasad Jagnath Varma
M/s. A.V.R. and Co. and Ors. V/s. Fairfield Co-operative Housing Soc. Ltd. and Ors.
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) 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 - ....
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.
(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 appeal upheld that expired leave and license agreements do not confer tenant rights; occupancy post-expiration was considered trespassing.
The intention of the parties, as expressed in contractual language, determines the distinction between a landlord-tenant relationship and that of a licensor-licensee.
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....
The distinction between lease and license must adhere to explicit terms of agreements, with possession alone insufficient to confer tenancy rights.
The determination of the relationship as licensee or tenant hinges on the parties' intention as reflected in the agreement, not merely on exclusive possession.
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.