J. S. VERMA, B. N. KIRPAL, M. SRINIVASAN
Malpe Vishwanath Acharya – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent
Judgment
Kirpal, J.-‘Lex injusta non est lex’, unjust laws are not laws, is what is being contended by the landlords in their challenge in these appeals, and the connected writ petitions, to the validity of the relevant provisions of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Bombay Rent Act’) in so far as it provides that landlords cannot charge rent in excess of the standard rent.
2. The appellants are landlords or their representatives of different premises in Bombay which have been given on rent to various tenants. They had filed in the High Court of Bombay writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Section 5 (10)(B), Section 11(1) and Section 12(3) of the Bombay Rent Act, inter alia, on the ground that the said provisions pertaining to standard rent were ultra vires Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution and consequently void. The main challenge to the said provisions was on the ground that the restriction on the right of the landlords to increase rents, which had been frozen as on 1st September, 1940 or at the time of the first letting, was no longer a reasonable restriction and the said provisions h
Rattan Arya & Ors. v. State of Tamil Nadu & Anr.
Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd. & Others v. State of U.P. & Others
State of M.P. v. Bhopal Sugar Industries
Narottam Kishore Dev Verma & others v. Union of India & another
Motor General Traders & Anr. etc. etc. v. State of A.P. & Ors. etc. etc.
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.