IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SANDEEP V.MARNE
Uma Ramji Tiwari – Appellant
Versus
Ashok Manilal Dubey (Deceased) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
1. The revisionary jurisdiction of this Court is invoked to set up a challenged to the judgment and decree dated 24 March 2022 passed by Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court dismissing Applicant's Appeal No. 93 of 2019 and confirming the eviction decree dated 11 March 2019 passed by the Learned Judge of the Small Causes Court in R.A.E. & R. Suit No. 113/355 of 1994.
2. I have heard Mr. Chaturvedi, the learned counsel appearing for the Applicant and Vinay Ashok Dwivedi-Respondent No.1a in person. I have considered the submissions canvassed by them and have also gone through the findings recorded by the Trial and the Appellate Courts as well as the documents and evidence placed on record.
3. It appears that the suit was initially filed by the Respondents/Plaintiffs seeking recovery of possession of the suit premises on the ground of non-user, change of user, default in payment of rent, unauthorized additions and alterations, acquisition of suitable alternate accommodation and commission of acts contrary to Section 108(o) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The Trial Court accepted the grounds of non-user, change of user, default in payment of rent,
Tenant must comply with statutory deposit requirements under Section 12(3) of the Bombay Rent Act, including interest and costs, to avoid eviction.
Timely application and deposit of rent, even if slightly delayed due to holidays, fulfill statutory requirements preventing eviction under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act.
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 tenant's failure to communicate rent deposits and respond to rent demands constitutes default, justifying eviction under the Bombay Rent Act.
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.
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 ....
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.
The court emphasized strict adherence to statutory provisions in eviction cases, particularly regarding rent payment and tenant obligations under the Bombay Rent Act.
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.
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.
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.