Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
M.M. SATHAYE
Suman Ramesh Samant – Appellant
Versus
Arun R. Patil – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of case and eviction grounds (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. contentions by applicant and respondent (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. trial court and appellate court decisions (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. court's reasoning on bonafide requirement and changes made (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. evidence and conclusions regarding damages and structures (Para 14 , 15) |
| 6. permanent structure and statutory interpretations (Para 19 , 20 , 22) |
| 7. final decision and order for eviction (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
JUDGMENT :
M.M. SATHAYE, J.
1. The Civil Revision Application is filed under section 115 of the CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE , 1908 (‘CPC’ for short) by original Plaintiff/landlady against Respondent/original Defendant/tenant, challenging the judgment and decree dated 22/09/2006 passed by 3rd Ad-hoc Additional District Judge, Kalyan in Civil Appeal No. 44 of 2003. Under the said impugned judgment and decree, the Appeal filed by Respondent/tenant was allowed, thereby setting aside the judgment and decree dated 15/02/2003 passed by 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kalyan in RCS/797/1996, thereby dismissing the said suit. The Trial Court had decreed the suit by directing the Respondent to hand over possession of
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.
Revisional jurisdiction permits interference with perverse appellate findings ignoring tenant's admissions of unauthorized substantial alterations, spouse's suitable residence acquisition, and subjec....
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....
Permanent alterations made by a tenant without landlord consent constitute grounds for eviction under Section 13(1)(b) of the Bombay Rent Act.
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 ....
Unauthorized alterations became permanent constructions without landlord consent, justifying eviction under Section 13(1)(b) of the Bombay Rent Act.
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....
Tenant's unauthorized construction on adjoining land caused nuisance, justifying eviction under tenant protection laws, while landlord retains rights as adjoining occupier despite not residing nearby....
A tenant's change of user from commercial to residential use constitutes a breach of tenancy terms under Section 108(o) of the Transfer of Property Act, independent of any proof of damage to the prem....
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
