Reserved On : 17/02/2026 Pronounced On : 03/03/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 80 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 81 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 411 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 412 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 413 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 414 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 415 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 416 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 417 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 418 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 419 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 421 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 422 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 423 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 424 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 425 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 426 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 427 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 428 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 429 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 430 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 431 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 432 of 2023 With R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 433 of 2023 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI ==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No ==========================================================

DHARMENDRA VALLABHBHAI RAMANI Versus JETPUR SWAMINARAYAN TRUST & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR HP BAXI(9459) for the Appellants MR MRUGEN K PUROHIT(1224) for the Respondent No. 1 NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI

CAV JUDGMENT

1. The present captioned Second Appeals have been preferred under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, “the Code”). The appeals arise out of identical and symmetrical facts and emanate from a common judgment and order passed by the learned First Appellate Court in a series of First Appeals.

2. In view of the commonality of issues involved and the similarity of the factual matrix, this Court proposes to adjudicate all the aforesaid Second Appeals by this common judgment and order, so as to avoid repetition and ensure consistency in judicial determination.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND:-

3. Since the factual backdrop in all the appeals is analogous, as per report, Second Appeal No. 80 of 2023 is treated as the lead matter, and the facts are being referred to therefrom for the sake of convenience. The relevant facts, shorn of unnecessary details, are as under:–

3.1. The appellants herein, who were the original petitioners before the Court below, instituted an application for fixation of standard rent under Section 11(3) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (for short, “the Rent Act”), against the landlord, namely Shri Jetpur Swaminarayan Trust, a public trust duly registered under the Gujarat Public Trusts Act.

3.1. The subject premises comprise multiple shops constructed upon non-agricultural land bearing Revenue Survey No. 698 paiki. The said shops were constructed by the Trust and let out to various tenants subsequent to the year 2001.

3.2. In the year 2019, the landlord issued a notice to the appellants seeking permitted increase in rent and terminating the tenancy. Within one month of receipt of the said notice, the appellants, asserting their status as tenants, preferred an application under Section 11(3) of the Rent Act for fixation of standard rent.

3.3. In the said proceedings, the landlord entered appearance and filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code, seeking rejection of the plaint. The said application was premised upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Malpe Vishwanath Acharya & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., (1998) 2 GLR 1364, wherein certain provisions relating to standard rent were analyzed and observed unconstitutional. Relying upon the ratio of the said decision, it was contended that the remedy under Section 11 of the Rent Act had become otiose and unenforceable and, therefore, the application for fixation