Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH
MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA
Fairdeal Enterprise – Appellant
Versus
Meera Bhattacharjee W/o Late Achyuta Sankor Bhattacharjee – Respondent
JUDGMENT & ORDER :
MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA, J.
1. Heard Mr. G. Jalan, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. J. H. Saikia, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. This revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has been filed by the petitioners, namely, (i) M/s Fairdeal Enterprise and (ii) Pradeep Kumar Deorah, impugning the judgment and decree dated 17.06.2025, passed in Title Appeal No. 28/2022 by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)No. 2, Kamrup(M) at Guwahati. By the impugned judgment and decree dated 13.09.2022 and 28.09.2022 respectively, passed in the Title Suit No.190/2022, by the Court of learned Munsiff No. 2, Kamrup(M) was reversed and the appellants were directed to be evicted from the suit premises on the ground of bona fide requirement by the respondent.
3. The facts relevant for the consideration of the instant revision petition, in brief, are that the respondent is the absolute owner of a room measuring approximately 360 square feet at Om Bhawan at M.L. Nehru Road, Panbazar, Guwahati, having GMC holding No. 10. The said room is more fully described in the schedule to
Bona fide requirement of landlord must be assessed based on actual need at the time of filing; subsequent events do not overshadow genuine intent if prior evidence supports the claim.
The bona fide requirement for landlord's premises must be substantiated with evidence, and landlords retain the right to determine their needs for personal or business use.
Proviso (e) to Section 5(1) of Act of 1972 stipulates that when tenant has not paid rent lawfully due from him in respect of house within a fortnight of its falling due would come within various grou....
The landlord's bona fide requirement for eviction is established even if he owns other properties, and the tenant cannot dictate the landlord's use of his properties.
The court affirmed that a landlord's bonafide requirement for premises is valid, and the tenant's irregular rent payments constitute default.
The court affirmed that a tenant's failure to comply with statutory rent payment timelines constitutes default, justifying eviction. Landlord's bona fide need for premises for business is a valid gro....
The judgment establishes the principles of bonafide requirement and comparative hardship in the context of eviction under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999.
Suit for realisation of the arrear rent for the period of the eviction proceedings would result in failure of justice as well as nullify the proposition of law that the tenant is bound to pay rent du....
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
